Ethical Media Case
a. Identify an actual media case which includes ethical considerations regarding law enforcement. The case may involve national or local news media, or book. This case must have already been disposed of by the courts. Try to choose an issue you’re already interested in, or something based on a personal experience. It will make this project more fun to do. The choice must NOT be something we already used for a class case study.
To find ideas, read, listen or watch the various forms of media. Additionally, you can get ideas from your textbooks, from class discussions to identify ethically-sensitive cases
b. Identify the ethical issue posed by the case and collect background information on this issue from library sources and interviews with experts. You’ll need to explain:
• History of the case (Research on the case should total at least three to five pages. and a good eight sources, books and articles included–not only web sites! You’ll probably have to rely on the library’s on-line databases, perhaps interlibrary loan.
• Identify there was an ethical dilemma
• Identify and discuss the ethical considerations using scientific information.
• Identify the legal considerations using scientific information.
• Identify and discuss the professional considerations in regards the code of ethics governing the profession
• Interview 3 experts in the field to get their opinion on the case. Responses for interview must be presented in the paper.
• Discuss how you would have handled the case as a law enforcement officer and make recommendations
Ethical Media Case
The case of the New York Times Co. v. the United States came as a rude shock for journalists everywhere. The case even came to be known as the Pentagon Papers Case. The Times were aggravated by the fact that the Nixon administration was preventing them as well as the Washington Post from publishing content that portrayed American activity in Vietnam (Editors, 2019). The administration however saw it as an interference that would ultimately compromise national security and they would not have it. The data did not even belong to the Nixon administration therefore they did not have any right over it (Duverge, 2016). It belonged to a classified Defense department and it contained information that would reveal the history of U.S. activity in the then war-torn country (Oyez, n.d.). Upon consultation of the President argued that a restraint was necessary for the preservation of national security. Eventually the case was dismissed with a 6-3 ruling that favored the media company. They could now pursue classified data as long as it was meant to inform members of the public.
Within this case, the ethical dilemmas lie where the government thought that the data that would be diverged was sensitive to the security of the state (Lo, 2012). In their opinion if it was to land in the wrong hands it could be used to plot against the state defense forces. It is paramount that the government act in the favor of the people’s security but these same people needed to be informed concerning what was going on around them. As highlighted by Levin, laws are usually imposed by society (Levin, 2010). This means they are the ones with the final say as to what direction and extent the law should protect them. They should not be withheld a right to information at all costs.
The Pentagon Papers had within them classified information that would put some top-secret plans and data from the department of defense. It outlined the U.S. political and military involvement in the Vietnam War of 1945 to 1967 (Sheehan, Smith, Kenworthy, & Butterfield, 2017). From a military perspective that was not safe as the plans they used at the time may have also come in handy and used on other fights thereafter. The chemicals as well as the ammunition they enlisted during this war would be set out in the open for people to see if publication went ahead. The use of napalm and gasoline brought devastating results of death as an aftermath of the war (Khan Academy, n.d.). These were things the Nixon presidency was not proud to be open about.
It seemed almost illegal for the times to want to publish such information. It was seen as a betrayal of the state secrets. This would essentially qualify as treason according to the state laws (The New York Times, 2019). This is why the case was brought to court. The codes of ethics that govern the media profession allow them to be frank concerning any matter that has an impact on and could infringe the rights of the citizens. According to the Times they were just disseminating information that could have been useful to the people. They needed to know what was happening when their government was out there fighting wars on behalf of other nations. The people come first with media and any opportunity to infringe this right is usually met with plenty of backlash from fellow media houses.
I conducted an interview with two experts in ethical law with regard to law enforcement as well as a law enforcement officer to capture their opinion on the matter. Since the matter can pose to be very sensitive with regard to how the police force would see it, they were the best respondents I would get to know what their feelings were with regard to the matter as well as how they would have handled the matter given the opportunity to judge on it (Editors, 2018). The initial expert went ahead to say that the media did indeed have rights to communicate on the subject and the government did not have to have proven apprehensive concerning the matter since it happen a long time ago. The second expert made it clear that there was no need of diverging the information as the people did not necessarily need it at the time it was published.
On the other hand, the law enforcement officer pointed out very well that were it not for mass media transparency and those providing people with such information, many people would not have the information which meant that even officers themselves would not have known what went on during the war. Personally, if the case was brought to me as a law enforcement officer I would have just let them publish the information. I would have dismissed it from the get go seeing as it was something that happen a long time ago and the weaponry and tactics have already evolved. I would recommend that media first seek permission before going forward with such case sensitive publications to avoid any court cases that would waste time and money.
References
Duverge, G. (2016, August 31). 6 Monumental Media Law Cases for Journalists. Retrieved from https://online.concordia.edu/communication/media-law-cases/
Editors, H. (2018, August 21). Pentagon Papers. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/pentagon-papers
Editors, H. (2019, March 29). Weapons of the Vietnam War. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/weapons-of-the-vietnam-war
Khan Academy. (n.d.). New York Times Co. v. United States (1971). Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-us-government-and-politics/civil-liberties-and-civil-rights/first-amendment-press/a/new-york-times-co-v-united-states-1971
Levin, A. V. (2010, May). Do I have an ethical dilemma? Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3003850/
Lo, B. (2012). Resolving ethical dilemmas: a guide for clinicians. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Oyez. (n.d.). New York Times Company v. United States. Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873
Sheehan, N., Smith, H., Kenworthy, E. W., & Butterfield, F. (2017). The Pentagon Papers: The Secret History of the Vietnam War. New York, NY: Skyhorse Publishing.
The New York Times. (2019, January 25). Treason against the United States. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1861/01/25/archives/treason-against-the-united-states.html
