Start A Hash-tag, Start A Riot: Case In Point

By Jed Magnusson

Although this subject strays from the other examples used and interpreted from the text, the topic lead me to include another perspective. In reviewing the other blog posts a few popular examples were used such as the Boston bombings and the use of social media, crowdsourcing and public journalism. But what is going on right now? I think its important to interpret this literature with a current event that is unfolding in front of us and how the use of the medias ethics and social media impacts it. Recently in Baltimore there have been a series of violent riots that have taken place over the death of a young black male due to an incident with a police officer. This is not the first time riots have broken out because of this issue, looking back to the example of Ferguson. Although there are plenty of ethics involved with this situation I will focus on the effect that social media has had with these riots.

As we can recognize social media is an instant stream of information that can be shared and viewed to massive audiences. Pulling from the examples given by Plaisance and the Boston Bombings citizens and news media sources were sharing and reporting information that was incorrect. According to Plaisance, some citizens Tweeted incorrect information from police scanners, spread rumors, and attempted to target innocent bystanders as suspected criminals (Plaisance, 2014).

With so many interpretations everyone that day had something to report but many without any hard evidence. Today it is almost too easy to get involved with an event. I will use a personal example from the riots in Baltimore, I was not able to watch the news on TV so I simply followed the hash tag on Twitter and was tapped into the constant stream of information, images, news updates and personal responses. Although this was informing me of the situation there is no spine to the majority of this content. I didn’t watch the news so I just went on social media. That really sums it up right there; putting that in perspective, news sources have traditionally been our source but having the availability of social media has entirely changed that. The news sources have responsible practices that mirror the practices that Plaisance outlines. Twitter has no practices or procedures, it’s an untamed animal with no leash, but hey the reality is, we all use it. And now more so than the news, throw out all the codes. Unfortunate this is the effect of social media; everyone is a reported and can share whatever they want to spread it through the world. These people aren’t experts, they don’t follow a code of ethics for reporting their information and there often no validation or accountability from this information.

Now that we recognize the reach of social media its time to get into the example of the riots. According to Fox News and local law enforcement in Baltimore social media is a significant cause of the riots. The hash tag #Purge referring to a movie about violent acts where no laws exist during a specific time period. (Foxnews.com) Unfortunate this notion was brought to life. As the hash tag began to grow the destruction began and the rest of the world watched as the riots took place. This is a wild example of social media. And not the first time this headline has been in the news. Social media has the range of creating and spreading false news to organizing riots. Its ignorant to exclude social media as a factor in these situations, but there is really no way to control it. That is the beautiful and terrible thing about it. Events like this only continue to drive its presence, it is feeding the beast.

On the other hand, the access of information is public, this gives law enforcement the opportunity monitor the events that are unfolding and who is starting them. It also gives them access to investigate individuals who partook in the riots and started the hash-tag, not all will be held accountable but it is a small ounce of justice. Law enforcement can also keep people up to date as a viable source of what is going on. (CNN) But in the midst of the media storm it often gets lost in the sea of tweets. Although they can use this as a tool they always seem one step behind. They always use it after the fact of the matter and are playing catch up; this example can be used for all sorts events that have taken place in the spotlight.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4211310751001/baltimore-riots-spark-debate-over-social-media/?#sp=show-clips

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/28/politics/baltimore-riot-social-media/

Plaisance, P. L. (2014). Media Ethics: Key Principles for Responsible Practice, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

An Ethical Analysis “How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying

By Jed Magnusson

How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying [Motion picture]. (1967). USA: Mirisch Corporation.

This film directed by David Swift was one of the few broadway shows to shine on the big screen. It takes place in 1967, corporate America is buzzing, the framework of the nine to five office cubicles is born. A young man armed with a book called, How To Succeed in Business decides to change his career from a window washer to pursue the ladder of business. From the guidance of this book his quick rise to chairman of the board is swift and deceitful. Based on the recommendations of the books this character is able to succeed but not without a trail of debris from this unethical path to power. At the core of this ethical analysis lies the age old debate of getting ahead. Is your own aspirations to get to the top greater than fair treatment and honesty to others? Is it acceptable to cheat to get ahead? In this case it really doesn’t require that much effort. The book implies to simply, pass off blame, steal ideas, lie and deceive those in a position of power to influence their judgment of you. There are many examples in which this happens in the film.

It’s no surprise that a window washer doesn’t have the credentials to make his way to the  top of a giant company. Following the guidance of the book he is able to swindle his way into replacing the first person of authority and make it from entry level mailroom to executive. This is the first unethical example, taking someone who is much more qualified and experienced for the jobs positioning, breaking the hierarchy of the system of promotion within the company. Once he is an executive position he begins to manipulate and deceive the CEO. He fakes his hours, presenting to his boss he had been working hard all night long when he had not. Doing this just to bait him, falsing showing similar habits such a knitting or the school that he went to. A lie in order to gain the respect and attention of the boss in order to move up the ladder.  This action is done multiple times in which it saves him from the reality that he is not qualified for the job, he even spies on the boss and has relations in his office, a breach of privacy and security. His lack of transparency is hidden by his wit and chapters from the book that he follows, encouraging such behavior. In conclusion of the ethical analysis, his shockingly quick rise to the top of the ladder does not come without, dishonesty, deceit, lack of transparency, blame and manipulation. Aside from the issues in the plot there are some other ethics that are relevant in the film, particularly to the era in which the film was produced and the societal norms of that time but we see a domiant white male ownership and sexsim in the office. At least they were courteous enough address the issue in this song A Secretary is Not a Toy

Why Sex Sells

After reading Between the Summits by Tom Cooper, I realized that the core bias and opinion of the media is based off of integrity. It is encouraging that the greater picture of ethics such as integrity and honesty are held higher than smaller subjects. As the study shows, respondents top six concerns revolve integrity, rather than a slightly more narrow minded subject, or topic, such as violence. This is a two sided debate, on one side, the statistics show that respondents opinions hold greater value in integrity and honesty than narrow subjects (violence, sex). On the other hand, the exposure and saturation of these subjects has been dulled over time. During the of the study the represented topics have become less of a concern to the societal norm. Even though the ethical integrity has seemed to develop it still hasn’t changed in the media. People get used to the smaller topics because it is in our face all of the time with mass communication being the way it is. Due to technology over the past two decades the accessibility and exposure of media has greatly increased the downfall in subjective issues in the media. Technology combined with mass communication has made these subjects impossible to ignore, therefore the statics on issues such as sex and violence become embedded in our culture. Reversely honesty, integrity and representation have developed.

Another observation to note also stems from technology and the growth of the media over time. As the article went on and the time frames changed, the topic of exaggeration and hyped news became an apparent subject. As the media is constantly in our faces, our privacy and exposure to the news has become increasingly saturated. Subjects in media ethics have continued to be represented on an old framework of ethics. Remain to continue on this framework has allowed subjects like sex to be a large part of our societal norms and especially advertising. In Coopers article sex as a subject was not seen as a larger issue in any of the statistics. The fact of the matter is simple, time after time, sex sells. Sex in our culture and society has always been a cornerstone of humor, innuendo and most of all sales.

There are a few examples to support the use of sex in advertising. Starting with an older example representing the initiation of sexualized content into mass media. Secondly an example of edgier content as a brand strategy and concluding with more relevant example for brands today. The first example of Abercrombie and Fitch found in Tom Reichert and Courtney Carpenter’s article An Update on Sex in Magazine Advertising: 1983 to 2003. I chose to use this as an example because it represents one of the first mainstream brands during the birth and expansion of mass media, Abercrombie. The results of the study found that during the 90’s sexually explicit content in advertising increases in a nature and in frequency. The article goes on to identify this social as a social trend. Abercrombie was one of this first brands to display this sort of sexualized edgy content. Looking back at in now, no one can argue that during this time it sold. Currently, their brand isn’t doing so well and it is no surprise due to the changing dynamics of advertising and social trends.

A few years later, another example can be found. in the early 2000’s to around 2010, Cosmopolitan magazine is recognized for the amount of sexual and objective content of the woman in their magazine. In this example the content of the article finds that using sex and woman was frequently used as a marketing strategy. Many times in the exemplified ads the woman and their sexual identities are highlighted more than the product or service being sold. (Gudekl, 2004). In comparison during these time periods, if we were to seek two large sources of trends and media content that influenced the social trends and societal norms, Abercrombie and Cosmopolitan were leaders  for producing this type of content and culture. Skipping a few years forward, as our culture has changed, there have been movements to change these norms in our society and break the framework that advertising has been sitting on for so long.  American Apparel, a very popular and edgy brand has found themselves in hot water multiple times for the content that they produce in their advertising and banned ads. As brands have evolved and smartened up enough to change their brand identity to match the social trends, their new CEO hopes to give them a new direction.

When I spoke about the topic of sex and objectivity of woman with some classmates, there still isnt a clear direction for the dynamic of this argument. The majority of the woman that I interviewed agreed that sexism and objectivity of women in advertising exists but the topic of sex in our culture is not a prioritized issue.  Sex does sell and in fact it may be more accepted in our culture than we realize. When speaking bluntly with the male audience I interviewed it was contrary (and somewhat obvious) that they didn’t really mind the sexualized content in today’s marketing and advertising. To no surprise, but on the other hand the majority of the males in my interviews did at least recognize how women are objectified in advertising.  As societal demands have it, most content shies away from the immense sexism of women in advertising compared to past years. When it does still excist in our advertising the sexized male content over the past few years has greatly increased. It clearly isn’t as present in the women’s debate but over the years we can’t ignore the the other gender in this category. In conclusion the sexulaized style of our society poses as no secret. Weather or not it will expand into a topic that can uproot the foundation of advertising and restructure the “sex sells” culture is unknown. As long as it keeps selling it will still exist and despite the acknowledgments of this contemporary ethical issue in the media it doesn’t seem like anyways priority.

References

Cooper, T. (2008). Between the Summits: What Americans think about media ethics. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 23. 15-27. DOI: 10.1080/08900520701753106

Gudekl, I. A & Celik, I. (2014). Using woman in advertsiment as a symbol of sex: cosmopolitan magazine example. Journal Of Yasar University, 35(9), 6129-6137.

Reichert, T. & Carpenter, C. (2004). An update on sex in magazine advertising: 1993 to 2003. Journal of Mass Communication,81(4), 823-837.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/507499451730932141/

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/438538082435637196/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/16/american-apparel-swedish-controversy_n_3285613.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/american-apparel-asa-banned-ads_n_3051751.html?utm_hp_ref=american-apparel

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-02-09/american-apparel-ceo-adds-new-angle-to-edgy-brand

Clifford G. Chrisitans

(Photo: Diederich College of Communication)

By Jed Magnusson

Today Clifford G. Christians is known as one of world’s leading scholars in the field of media ethics and communications.  His 30 year career at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign goes back to when he was a student there. The foundation of his ethics was built on his masters degrees in both Theology and in Sociolinguistics. The program required him to read the original language of Aristotle and Plato, two scholars in which he idolized in his studies. Christians went on too complete his PH. D at the University of Illinois focusing on communications theory and the philosophy of communications. For Clifford all of his degrees were centred on the question of ethics. His work teaching, writing and giving lectures has traveled across the world to more than 25 countries as well as being recognized as a visiting scholar in ethics at Princeton University, the University of Chicago and in the Pew Program at Oxford University. With two masters and two doctorates degrees he began to carve out his own theories and understandings of ethics in communication. After helping to create 12 books, more than 25 academic journals, receiving 8 awards for teaching excellence and over 25 honors and awards. It is safe to say that Christians is a pioneer for how we study ethics in communications and media.

Since completing his degrees at the University of Illinois in 1974 Clifford has the unique perspective both in education, generation and society. Being part of his generations he was at the forefront of discovery both in academics regarding communications, social ethics and the media. At the same time he was able to witness the rise of the media and connect his academic work and changes in society. Therefore validating his theory and methods further than just academic work could take him. Cliffords biggest interests are in social ethics, both in theory and application. He recognizes society as an embodiment of communication and that no social institution is possible except as a communication system. (Arneson, 2011) Clifford states that social ethics commit us to understand the values that make society possible. Based on his studies he emphasized that to study social ethics, the best venue to do so is to concentrate on communication. In his case Clifford has developed  a new concept within the world of social ethics, he claims the term, “communitarian ethics.” Communitarian ethics is a claim of normative ethics In an interview Cliffords declares, “Philosophy is a discipline. Communications is not, in my understanding of it. Communications is a problematic, a field of interest that people have. It is an academic area but interdisciplinary and focused on crucial issues that aren’t neatly contained with a disciplinary boundaries…One works out moral problems in context of communications, but the formulation of them is philosophical in character” (Arenson, pg. 5) This is where the bridge is made to media ethics, another focus of Cliffords work. In reference to his quote the focus of crucial issues that aren’t neatly contained with a boundary of ethics is a perfect representation of the media. In Cliffords mind he claims that the media produce and maintain pop culture. Perhaps the most affluent application of theory from Clifford comes from asking the question for a new set of ethics. There are new technologies so why wouldn’t there be new ethics? With what we see in the media today and its behaviors it is clear that a line has yet to be  drawn in the sand about the ethical framework in the media.

As Clifford’s applications and theories of these ethics has it, the reaction of ethics in this situation react upon a frame of philosophy with a situational decision based on the individual. In much of Christians literature he refers to the “truth” and”justice.” In an interview Clifford recognizes truth as a crucial factor in the world of communication and presented the relationship between this a “problematic” communication and the discipline of philosophy as interactive. (Arenson, 2011) This interactive relationship presents new boundaries for communication ethics.. Along with truth, Clifford emphasizes justice, in media ethics and communication the lines for justice are blurred by new technologies and the vastness of cyberspace. Literature published by Clifford on the Philosophy of Technology states that, “to orient media ethics in the right direction, a different philosophy of technology is essential.” (Clifford) Christians philosophy on communication begins with the issue of instrumentalism  (John Dewey), inheriting this opinion from Aristotle, technology is neutral and unfolds out of its own character and does not condition our humanness. Us as humans control technology and therefor as humans condition the ethics of technology. (Clifford, 2008)

To summarize the matter of ethics in communication and media in a new era of technology Clifford outlines the legitimacy of these new ethics by establishing recommendations for this future of ethics. In Cliffords literature of media ethics he presents five domains to focus on when establishing the legitimacy of media ethics. The first domain presents the adaptation of a new theory for media ethics. He recommends that a new kind of theorizing is necessary that revolutionizes the engagement with public life. By focusing on public life this is a more realistic adaptations of ethics rather than theorizing, focus on what’s real in public. In short, reestablishing the foundations of human nature based on the changes that have happened with public life.  The second domain represents social philosophy, what Clifford is defining in this domain is general morality. In the media professional morality must be redefined and improved based on the media dynamic. His third domain calls upon religion, as many ethics recognizes religion, Clifford is no different than to ignore its importance in ethics. He suggests that a commitment be made to legitimize the ethics of religions and its new role and place in society. The foundation for many ethics and morality is based on religion, this domain calls upon scholarly work to innovate the practices religion that match this generations affiliation with religions in the media. The fourth domain, most relevant the progress in media and communication ethics is centered around technology. Clifford recognizes the need for an ethical shift with computer-based theorizing. Technology presents a virtual reality according to Clifford and that the solution stretches across philosophical ethics and media ethics. Lastly, the fifth and final domain and a cornerstone of much of Clifford’s theory is truth. This domain calls upon a moral imperative (Kant), that the press and the media as an outlet and source of media withhold value in the truth. (Christians, 2008) Given the literature that Clifford’s presents, it is clear that he can be recognized as a forefather in developing as well a translating the existing and future ethics of media and communication.

References

Arenson, (2011) A Conversation about Communication Ethics with Clifford G. Christians [Personal interview]. (n.d.). Arenson

Christians, C. G. (2008). Media Ethics in Education. Journalism and Mass Communication, 180-221.

Christians, C. G. (2008). Media Ethics on a Higher Order of Magnitude. Journal Of Mass  Media Ethics, 23(1), 3-14.

Christians, C. G. (2011). The Philosophy of Technology Journalism Studies, 12(6), 727-737.

Thorn, D. (2009, May 17). Honorary Degree Recipient. Retrieved February 11, 2015, from http://www.marquette.edu/