Reporters have the responsibility to weigh any potential harm, and to verify information before publishing a story but the real question is; “is the media’s responsibility to give all the news it encounters?”.
Coverage of the news is debatable especially because of the topics such as privacy, decency and politics. In today’s world, some media companies are more tolerant whereas some others refuse to publish all the news that they retain to public, because of their private beliefs. For example Zaman, a Turkish newspaper that is slightly more conservative than other newspapers, does not have any remarkable news about the new law of abortion, and people’s reaction and protest against it throughout the country. The new law, which is debatable whether or not to come into effect in Turkey, is about a prohibition for pregnant women who want to have an abortion after ten months of their pregnancy. Zaman, a proponent of this law, published several news that are only about the dangers of abortion and the questionable moral side of having abortion. For example, one of the news is about Maria Miller’s article that contains a headline like “Having abortion should be reduced to 20 weeks”. (http://www.zaman.com.tr/newsDetail_getNewsById.action;jsessionid=D2CA11AAB37C33386E1615C4A3FCA82C?newsId=1353660&columnistId=0) Another example is about an article that contains a headline “Kids that are expected to have obstacles can be born wealthy”. (http://www.zaman.com.tr/newsDetail_getNewsById.action;jsessionid=D2CA11AAB37C33386E1615C4A3FCA82C?newsId=1337752&columnistId=0) These news are obviously “taking side news” and somewhat a protest against people who are against the law. In contrast, Radikal, as a more neutral newspaper, has lots of news about women’s protests against the new law of abortion and also published government’s perception about this issue during the time when Zaman was publishing their article about abortion. There are some other examples of news form Radikal newspaper that have headlines like “The right of not giving birth came into effect in the fundamental law”. (http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&ArticleID=1100250&CategoryID=77) or “Resolution to have abortion and protection for Z.K”. (”http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&ArticleID=1100107&CategoryID=77) These news are only informative and do not embrace any information that is biased.
According to these examples, media has to give all the details of the news and this is one of the responsibilities of being a journalist. If a firm chooses to publish the news or not, this decision of course brings the idea of taking sides. Therefore, according to the Online Journalism Review and all the other journalism handbooks, “… most important is to never utilise your power of press for personal gains…”. (http://www.ojr.org/ojr/wiki/ethics/) Certainly, good journalism comes from giving every detail of the news accurately and reliably and taking no sides. Although, the medias are free to publish any information or opinion they desire, a good media company should be responsible to present all the news without any biased information. Furthermore firms should represent all news with all perspectives and thus the true journalism can be achieved. If medias choose to publish some news whereas hiding other, public would never learn all the news precisely. Journalists should be as transparent as possible about sources and methods so audiences can make their own assessment of the information.
Reporters have the responsibility to weigh any potential harm, and to verify information before publishing a story but the real question is; “is the media’s responsibility to give all the news it encounters?”.
Coverage of the news is debatable especially because of the topics such as privacy, decency and politics. In today’s world, some media companies are more tolerant whereas some others refuse to publish all the news that they retain to public, because of their private beliefs. For example Zaman, a Turkish newspaper that is slightly more conservative than other newspapers, does not have any remarkable news about the new law of abortion, and people’s reaction and protest against it throughout the country. The new law, which is debatable whether or not to come into effect in Turkey, is about a prohibition for pregnant women who want to have an abortion after ten months of their pregnancy. Zaman, a proponent of this law, published several news that are only about the dangers of abortion and the questionable moral side of having abortion. For example, one of the news is about Maria Miller’s article that contains a headline like “Having abortion should be reduced to 20 weeks”. (http://www.zaman.com.tr/newsDetail_getNewsById.action;jsessionid=D2CA11AAB37C33386E1615C4A3FCA82C?newsId=1353660&columnistId=0) Another example is about an article that contains a headline “Kids that are expected to have obstacles can be born wealthy”. (http://www.zaman.com.tr/newsDetail_getNewsById.action;jsessionid=D2CA11AAB37C33386E1615C4A3FCA82C?newsId=1337752&columnistId=0) These news are obviously “taking side news” and somewhat a protest against people who are against the law. In contrast, Radikal, as a more neutral newspaper, has lots of news about women’s protests against the new law of abortion and also published government’s perception about this issue during the time when Zaman was publishing their article about abortion. There are some other examples of news form Radikal newspaper that have headlines like “The right of not giving birth came into effect in the fundamental law”. (http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&ArticleID=1100250&CategoryID=77) or “Resolution to have abortion and protection for Z.K”. (”http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&ArticleID=1100107&CategoryID=77) These news are only informative and do not embrace any information that is biased.
According to these examples, media has to give all the details of the news and this is one of the responsibilities of being a journalist. If a firm chooses to publish the news or not, this decision of course brings the idea of taking sides. Therefore, according to the Online Journalism Review and all the other journalism handbooks, “… most important is to never utilise your power of press for personal gains…”. (http://www.ojr.org/ojr/wiki/ethics/) Certainly, good journalism comes from giving every detail of the news accurately and reliably and taking no sides. Although, the medias are free to publish any information or opinion they desire, a good media company should be responsible to present all the news without any biased information. Furthermore firms should represent all news with all perspectives and thus the true journalism can be achieved. If medias choose to publish some news whereas hiding other, public would never learn all the news precisely. Journalists should be as transparent as possible about sources and methods so audiences can make their own assessment of the information.
