Innocent until proven guilty?

Posted on March 20, 2015 by S. Molly Dominick

By S. MOLLY DOMINICK

Often times in the news, victims of a crime remain unnamed. Ethical practices dictate that journalists must help shield victims from the unfavorable limelight of the media and the unforgiving public eye.

But what about alleged perpetrators? Their names are always included in the news, no questions asked — even when their involvement is not yet confirmed.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Having the story of your victimization published in the news will likely be traumatizing, understandably. But less often acknowledged is that having your name plastered on headlines for a crime you didn’t commit will absolutely shatter your world and all of your connections. Your name will be stained forever because of the association now drawn between you and the incident, even after being proven innocent.

Take the story of Jordan Johnson, for example. He was a University of Montana student found not guilty of rape in a 2013 decision. According to the justice system, this young student is innocent. But look when you type “Jordan Johnson” into Google:

Three of the five pictures loaded first by Google are this student on trial.

Largely due to the media coverage he received, these false allegations will follow him for the rest of his life.

So, omit his name? But how do you avoid including his name when journalists are obligated to provide the public with thorough information? Seemingly, you can’t … yet journalists have collectively decided leaving this informational hole is okay when it comes to the victim.

There is no right answer to what should be done here. Journalism ethics, like any other form of ethics, is a wishy-washy mess of conflicting strong feelings and shaken fists.

But there needs to be some consistency. Either respect the lives of both victim and alleged perpetrator by including neither name, or honor journalism’s obligation to thoroughness and include both.

Humans of The White House

Posted on February 6, 2015 by Diya Vasudevan

By DIYA VASUDEVAN

Humans of New York

If you have not heard of it before today, you will know about it soon. Brandon Stanton, the creator of the Facebook pages known as HONY, has forever changed the life of Vidal Chastanet, a young boy from a Brooklyn Middle School.

What was an extremely popular photo series blog created by Stanton, turned into a vehicle for change. Just by sharing a few kind words about a very important person in Vidal’s life, the lives of Vidal and those around him have changed forever.

Stanton’s blog shows ordinary people and gives insight into their extraordinary lives, and that is exactly what this story has become, extraordinary. After Vidal expressed his sentiments for his middle school principle Nadia Lopez on Stanton’s site, the photo went viral, and the viewers of HONY did what they do best which was to offer all they could to assist in the aims of Vidal’s principal, Lopez. With Stanton heading the fundraiser, the school managed to raise $1.2 million — far exceeding their initial aims.

One boy’s kind words helped raise $1.2 million, helped provide the additional support his principal needed to continue fighting for what she believed in and got him to where he was this past Thursday, The White House.

In perhaps the most important of Stanton’s photo stories, he captures President Barack Obama’s words “You don’t do things alone. Nobody does things alone. Everybody always needs support. For a young man like you, you should never be too afraid or too shy to look for people who can encourage you or mentor you,” Obama said. “There are a lot of people out there who want to provide advice and support to people who are trying to do the right thing. So you’ll have a lot of people helping you. Just always remember to be open to help. Never think that you know everything. And always be ready to listen.”

President Obama’s words could not be closer to the truth and Vidal’s story is proof of just that.

Legislation strikes at LGBTQ community

Posted on February 6, 2015 by Taylor Brotons

By TAYLOR BROTONS

As of this new year, many Florida conservatives were taken aback by the decision made by U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle. He has made it so each of the 67 Florida counties must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. This is a huge step for gay rights, but as with most political happenings in Florida, we take one step forward and then someone decides to take two steps back.

Now a specific group of the LGBTQ community is being ostracized in a vindictive, hypocritical and very invasive way. The most intolerant and bigoted of our state’s legislators have proposed a bill that could have a trans-person charged with a first-degree misdemeanor by using a bathroom that the legislation determines is wrong based on their “biological sex.”

I would like to believe that by this day and age people are starting to be a little more accepting of others and understand that for the most part, gender is a social construct. Yes, you have a biological sex at birth, but what deems someone male or female has very little to do with their sex organs and much more to do with how they feel comfortable presenting themselves to the world.

Unfortunately, those in the state legislature do not see it the same way. This bill would basically put the power in the hands of the bully. If a trans-person is caught using a bathroom not matching their “biological sex” they can be sentenced up to one year in prison. If any non-trans-person finds a trans-person in a bathroom not matching their “biological sex” they can sue. If the business owner of where the bathroom is located does not actively prevent trans-people from using the “wrong” bathroom, they can be sued by customers as well and are liable for a civil suit.

It is as methodically spiteful and malicious as it is frustrating. The icing on the cake is that if sued successfully, the trans-person or the business owner, will have to pay the attorney fees of all parties involved.

This bill is a blatant discriminatory act against trans-people and those who support them. Not only does it condone the harassment of trans-people, but if also impedes on the rights of store owners to be non-discriminatory. The LGBTQ community faces constant violence, discrimination, humiliation and an overwhelming amount of hatred in this county, this bill takes a step even further and leaves them nowhere to hide.

Uber official threatens journalists

Posted on November 21, 2014 by Katherine Fernandes

By KATHERINE FERNANDES

Uber has caught the nation’s attention as a successful transportation company with its ride-sharing business. The company is an efficient and cheap alternative to more traditional transportation such as taxis and limos. However, it is a very controversial company that is in constant war with its own hired drivers, taxi drivers, city governments and even journalists.

Believe it or not, a professional, successful and fast growing ride company, considers that it should hire opposition researchers to “dig up the dirt on journalists who criticized their company” and give the news media “a taste of its own medicine.”

Uber has been heavily criticized for using “dirty tricks” to impair its rival companies, for offering rides to “hot girls” in order to promote the company and for being careless about addressing the problem of female passengers receiving undesired sexual attention.

Now, the company is being aggressive with the news media. Last Friday night, Emil Michael, the company’s vice president, told guests at an Uber dinner party in New York City, that the company should battle negative media critics by spending $1 million to get rid of the defamatory information that media created about the company and that it should also damage the reputation of journalists who slandered Uber’s public image.

According to BuzzFeed, Michael put Sarah Lacy, editor and journalist of PandoDaily who has been critical of “Uber’s sexism,” as an example of an obstructionist journalist. Michael said that he wanted to investigate a “particular and very specific detail” about her personal life in order to damage her reputation as well.

Lacy, who wrote an article suggesting that passengers are more to likely to face sexual assault from an Uber driver than from a regular taxi driver, called these comments “horrifying.”

Michael was not aware that journalists were present at the dinner, listening to every single word he used. He probably wouldn’t have said that if someone had told him journalists were there. Michael ended up damaging the name of his company even more than he thought the news media did.

Michael had no option but to apologize because he really damaged his company’s name.

“My remarks were borne out of frustration during an informal debate over what I feel is sensationalistic media coverage of the company I am proud to work for,” Michael said on Monday. “My comments don’t reflect my actual views and I regret making them,” he added.

Despite Michael’s apology, his remarks are still being discussed all over the media as shocking.

According to a BuzzFeed report, Uber gained access to a reporter’s personal travel information just because the reporter was working on an article about the company. So, does this mean that Uber can obtain access to all its passengers’ personal information as well? … Maybe the federal government needs to keep an eye on this company’s efforts to access people’s private information.

Michael’s remarks might be the toughest challenges that Uber has ever faced. People are now doubting the company’s behavior.

What happened last week tells the world Uber is an untrustworthy company. Needless to say, Uber is getting a lot of negative publicity. This could damage the company’s growth for the next years if they don’t instill the value of morality within their company.

Bill Cosby and his legacy

Posted on November 21, 2014 by Autumn Robertson

By AUTUMN ROBERTSON

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock for the past two weeks, you would know that there have been several allegations from multiple women claiming that Bill Cosby has committed sexual assault against them within the past three decades.

This came as a shocker for many, as the general public looked at Cosby as “America’s Favorite Dad” — the G-rated comedian who’s claim to fame was a hilarious father with no-nonsense parenting skills on “The Cosby Show,” one of the most successful television sitcoms of all time.

Whether or not the allegations are true, the sexual assault news has caused much bad press for Cosby. Associated Press announced yesterday that TV Land, a cable network known for airing throwback shows, has pulled “The Cosby Show” indefinitely from its network in light of the allegations. Netflix has also announced that a Cosby special that it was to release in late November has been postponed, and NBC announced that a show that it had in the works with Cosby will no longer be moving forward.

It is incredible to see how something like rape allegations will affect the overall legacy of someone who was known for his positive image throughout his career. Cosby’s incredible achievements will no longer be highlighted as sexual assault will cover everything that he has ever done. Networks have snatched his projects up with a quickness and stories involving Bill Cosby after the scandal has blown over will always include that he has committed sexual assault.

Cosby, 77, is aging and will reach his final days sooner than later. Will he be remembered more so for his achievements or the negatives? Will he grace the covers of People or Time or will he just be a blurb within the first pages of the magazine? It will be interesting to see how the media will portray his legacy.

Media battle through cartoons

Posted on November 3, 2014 by Meaghan McClure

By MEAGHAN MCCLURE

On Sept. 23, India successfully launched its first Mars mission. Shortly after, The New York Times ran a political cartoon mocking the country that can be construed as racist.

The caricature depicts an Indian man, leading a cow, into a building marked “Elite Space Club,” which is full of white men in suits.

The Times soon experienced relentless backlash, to which they took to Facebook to publicly apologize.

The best part of this story is how the Indian media handled this offense.

They did not come back with a retort right away, no. They waited for the perfect opportunity to passive aggressively mock the U.S. back, which conveniently came in the form of a failed space mission.

On Oct. 28, an unmanned rocket – resulting in no injuries or deaths – exploded during liftoff. This proved perfect ammunition for the Indian media comeback.

Following the accident, the Hindustan Times ran a cartoon depicting an Indian couple observing the explosion, exclaiming, “It’s not rocket science for us!” The explosion took place in the “Elite Space Club.”

This little correspondence between two country’s newspapers is entertaining, and something most readers would never pick up on. I commend the Hindustan Times for approaching the situation in more of a light-hearted manner than most media outlets would take. They accepted the offense and acknowledged it in humor, all while creating an interesting story to look at from a media perspective.

You can take a look at both of the cartoons here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/hayesbrown/an-indian-newspaper-just-had-the-perfect-comeback-to-a-racis.

Breaking news and privacy issues

Posted on October 28, 2014 by Gabriella Shofer

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

The way that news reporters handle sensitive issues is a strong point of discussion in the news industry. Over the weekend, I became engrossed with following the updates of a national news story in Australia that hit home for me as it affected my community and dealt with a sensitive issue.

The story covered the disappearance and search for an 11-year-old girl that was declared missing after running away from home on Saturday evening. The search began for the girl when she hadn’t returned home since she left after an argument. Fortunately, she was found after a desperate two-day search conducted by more than 1,000 volunteers and the police.

The positive attributes of the news industry were highlighted through their assistance in the search for the girl as multiple news outlets broadcast the story on the television, print newspapers and online. This aided the search by increasing awareness and, ultimately, the cohesion of the news outlets with the family was what led to the girl being found safe so quickly.

However, following the girl being found and returned to her family, I found certain aspects of the news coverage of the story rather invasive and potentially detrimental to her recovery and her future. In particular, when the parents of the girl went to fetch her, they were bombarded by news reporters standing outside their house and following them with cameras and recording devices. This invaded their privacy during an incredibly difficult time. Additionally, the girl’s father then became the subject of some news articles as they delved into the family history to discover that he was due to attend court on a separate manner.

In covering this sensitive issue, reporters need to remember the potential future impact that their reports can have on the girl’s life. Not only will she need to recover from the ordeal, but she also has to deal with life in the spotlight until the news coverage dies down. This is incredibly difficult for a girl of her young age to have to deal with and the reports will forever follow her due to the everlasting nature of the Internet and the ability to find information with a simple Google search. This demonstrates how it is important for news reporters to remain mindful of both their obligation to report the news but also to respect the privacy of the people involved in their stories.

More information about the story can be found here.