Media ethics are an oxymoron in an era when news outlets thrive on assassinating the reputations of public figures with unproven allegations while sacrificing what few principles they profess on the altar of shameless exploitation.
Two recent high-profile cases underscore this sleazy brand of journalism. The pillorying of presidential candidate Herman Cain and the savaging of college football coach Joe Paterno are recent examples of how the media has abandoned all pretense of fairness and objectivity in reporting.
Once standards dictated that journalists wait for law enforcement officials to file charges before reporting on allegations, heresy or gossip. But in the race for ratings, media organizations now turn to sensationalism, shock and sex to pander to their audience's worst prurient interests.
Before taking up the Cain and Paterno cases, a caveat is in order. What follows is NOT a defense of either man, but an indictment of the reporters and editors who have allowed their own bias and views to trample journalistic professionalism.
Weeks ago unfounded allegations surfaced regarding Cain's alleged sexual harassment of women. The media smelled blood when Cain stumbled in his initial denials. That was all the license they needed to air innuendo and salacious statements from alleged and often anonymous victims.
After some crawfishing Cain did admit that a sexual harassment settlement was made without his knowledge by his former employer. That became a lightning rod for the media, which treated the legal deal as an admission of guilt.
News coverage of the Cain allegations stands in sharp contrast to similar sexual harassment charges against President Clinton. In 1999, Clinton quietly reached an out-of-court settlement in the sexual harassment case filed by Paula Jones after his repeated claims of innocence.
The legal maneuver came on the heels of a federal district judge's criticism of Clinton for "willful failure" to obey her repeated orders to testify truthfully in the lawsuit lodged by Ms. Jones. The judged fined Clinton for his conduct. News of the settlement was either buried or not mentioned.
Judging from the news treatment of the allegations against Cain, there can be no question of the media's double standard. It also begs the question: If Clinton was fit to remain as president despite a sexual harassment settlement, why should a similar legal agreement disqualify Cain from that office?
While Cain continues to soldier on in the presidential race, Penn State's Joe Paterno has been forced out by the board of trustees after 46 years as head football coach. The action follows a grand jury investigation of former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky, who has been charged with 40 counts of sexual abuse of children.
Once the scandal broke, several top Penn State officials, including the athletic director, stepped down. Immediately the news media, including influential sports media giant ESPN, demanded Paterno's resignation, even though prosecutors had indicated the coach would not be charged with a crime.
Among the few facts released by the prosecutors was a report that once Paterno was made aware of the allegation, the head coach advised the athletic director as required. In a later statement, Paterno publicly admitted remorse for not doing more to investigate the allegation.
That admission didn't satisfy the media's unquenchable thirst to humiliate Paterno. The media's suffocating coverage bullied the university's trustees into a hastily called meeting that ended with Paterno's firing, depriving the coach of an opportunity to gracefully step down days before it was revealed he had lung cancer.
One only has to remember the Duke lacrosse case as a cautionary tale of media justice. To refresh your memory, three members of the Duke lacrosse team were charged in 2006 with raping a woman at a party. Because of the university's pristine reputation, the media enthusiastically reported the allegations and battered Duke's reputation as if it was a piñata.
After more than a year of unrelenting coverage, the charges were proven false and the unscrupulous prosecutor in the case was disbarred. Unfortunately, the facts surfaced after the Lacrosse coach had been fired, player reputations were ruined and the team's season cancelled by the university president.
Paterno and Cain may indeed be guilty of crimes. If so, they deserve our scorn. But until they are charged in a court of law and a jury finds them guilty, they remain innocent. The heinous nature of the allegations do not justify the media's rush to judgment.
Fairness and objectivity may seem like quaint values to today's journalists, but they are standards worth upholding. Media consumers should demand nothing less.
No comments:
Post a Comment