Humanness: The Case Of The Bakersfield Californian

Introduction In the case of media and journalism, there is often the desire established by the producer to make its material noteworthy in some form or fashion to the audience. News outlets indicate which types of stories it will run, and, often, that is determined by the audience. Not only that, but they determine what it is about those stories that make them attractive to the audience. Indeed, there is nothing inherently wrong with this. Any company has the right to tailor its material to suit its audience. However, there is something pertinent to the media that must be taken into account when it goes about its task of reporting to the public. The media must be aware of citizen's rights – but, in particular, they must recognize the weight …show more content…
One is able to identify values held by the family that experienced the loss, as well as the values maintained by the Bakersfield Californian. To begin with, it can be seen that the Romero family held the value of humanness during their time of grief. This concept of humanness is embodied in their reaction to the tragedy and how personal of an event it was for them. It should be easily understood that the loss of a family member induces a feeling of loss...beyond the comprehension of those that have not experienced that tragedy. Therefore the value of humanness applies because the family expresses something that is characteristic and relating to human beings. On the other hand, the values taken by the Bakersfield Californian fall under human interest. This event was, rightfully so, terrible for the family. However, it did not necessarily have any measurable, long term affect on the community at large. By and large, it did not have the typical news values like proximity, conflict, or impact/magnitude. The media held the instance under the blanket of human interest, and presented it as a learning lesson for society. However, as stated in Media Ethics: Cases and Moral Reasoning, “Perhaps in the name of reporting news, the photojournalist in this case was actually caught in those opportunistic professional values that build circulation by playing on the human penchant for morbidity,”(Christians …show more content…
They can not be sure that the greatest good will be achieved.
Judeo-Christian Persons as Ends: This is an interesting ethical principle to consider for this situation, but can also be seen as not applicable. The case at hand fails to meet the criteria of unconditional love(loving people regardless of the situation), and does not rely upon the unity of the society for unselfishness. The reporter is doing his job, and is not doing it for the cause of unconditional love. Therefore, this principle is not applicable.
Rawls' Veil of Ignorance:At first glance, one might believe that this ethical principle would deem the situation as being ethical. Rawls' Veil of Ignorance takes both groups and views them under an unbiased light. However, it is heavily indicative of justice. In the case of Edward Romero, there is not a case of justice being upheld. Rather, it is the problem of invasion of privacy, and simply determining whether or not the reporter should have taken the picture. Rawls' Veil of Ignorance would most likely confuse the issue, and make it difficult to truly see the problem at hand.
Loyalties