I don't believe it is ever ethical to alter a photograph in news reporting. The only time I believe something should be blurred or altered is when the photo is extremely graphic. But in that case, the photo should probably not be in the publication anyway.
I feel like news outlets should not adjust their reporting due to the public's demands. But the fact of the matter is, journalism is a business. News outlets need to attract as much attention to their companies as possible to gain as much advertising revenue as they can. I believe this erodes the quality of news being reporting because what we as the public want to know about isn't always the most news worthy.
It presents a problem because if journalists are accepting "freebies" off of companies, many people think that those journalist are more likely to bend the truth in reporting in order to benefit those companies.
I think one news outlet picked up those fake stories and the other news outlets didn't want to be left out. If other media outlets were covering those issues then they must have been news worthy is most likely what the media thought. It is certainly a lot easier for those sort pranks to surface on the internet. I'm not sure if internet media sources like the Huffington Post and the Drudge Report are more likely to get fooled then CNN or Fox.
No comments:
Post a Comment