DCMA Graduate Project Spring 2020

digital video and new media journalism ethics

By Natalie Wade Faculty Advisor: B. Rich Table of Contents

Abstract 2 Introduction 3 Code of Ethics Overview 4 Video Journalism 6 Why Changes Need to Be Made 8 Power 8 Fake News 9 Citizen Journalism 10 Ethical Dilemmas in Video-Based and Digital Journalism 13

New Media and Video Journalism Ethics Survey 15 Method 15 Survey Questions (not including demographic questions) 15 Hypothesis 16 Sampling 17 Questionnaire 18 Demographics 19 Suggested Improvements 26 Conclusion 27 Code of Ethics 28 Citations 29

1 Abstract

In this literary and research analysis, I will examine the journalist code of ethics using the deontological ethical framework, to identify the elements missing for it to be relevant to a more contemporary, digitally influenced version of journalism. After reviewing the current code and practical applications of ethics, I will discuss video journalism specifically using the three challenges that arise with new media as outlined in Charles Ess’ Digital Media Ethics. I will also ​ ​ conduct a survey that will assess current journalists' understanding and perception of ethics when it comes to video-based journalism and new media.

I then will approach the ways we can work towards updating that current code of ethics to ensure that it includes specific answers to common ethical dilemmas for multimedia journalists who work with video content. For this aspect of the paper, I have developed a quantitative approach that would include surveying current journalists to identify ethical grey areas and then develop a mock-up of a media-literate code of ethics for journalists (and documentary filmmakers if it applies).

The term digital media means content created, edited, or accessed in a digital form.

Digital media includes video, audio, or several other digital platforms. In this paper, I will use the term digital media when referencing something that encompasses video media as well as other forms. This paper will center journalism from a western lens and discuss journalism within the United States.

2 Introduction

The term ‘Ethics’ has a wide scope. Theories extend to a number of situations, institutions, and communities and we utilize and analyze them in order to interpret “right” from

“wrong.” Journalism ethics is different from many other spheres of ethics because those who practice it are expected to uphold a rigid code of ethics developed to protect sources; function as a political check on the government; and remain unbiased, even in complex ethical situations.

There exist strict guidelines that major media outlets are expected to adhere to. Although arguments arise over the interpretation of some points laid out in this code, most of the decisions regarding ethical conundrums do not fall on the individual journalist without this code as guidance.

Today, however, journalism does not solely manifest between the pages of a newspaper and it hasn’t for a very long time. Contemporary journalism’s definition has expanded into a multifaceted distribution of content, combining media formats. With this expansion — which has ​ ​ been predominantly propelled by the development of the internet and the digital video camera — ​ media journalism has upended the development of news through this new means of production and delivery, changed how it is consumed, and refashioned the existing expectations.

Outlets have adapted, attempting to keep up with rapid technological advancements, and looking for new ways to make their stories marketable to internet-savvy consumers who are accustomed to a high quality of production. The ease of image-capture and post-production has led to more professional journalists and citizen journalists sharing video content, while traditional media outlets experiment with ways to incorporate video into their digital publishing.

3 However, the traditional principles of journalism ethics were not developed for the current day capabilities of digital videos. New ethical issues have developed with the advent of advanced video technology, and it is important for journalists to be able to identify ways media outlets could potentially abuse their power using said technology. To uphold the journalist codes standards, a hyper-specific code of ethics for video must exist, specifically addressing video manipulation, copyright issues, and the unclear distinction between news and opinion or commentary pieces.

Code of Ethics Overview

The journalism code of ethics was born as a counterbalance to protect sources, to validate journalists’ claims as a cornerstone of democracy, and provide a way to establish the news as a trustworthy political check on the government. According to media ethicist Stephen Ward:

“Journalism, at its best, is one of the arts of democracy. Journalists provide the news and analysis by which a society communicates with itself, allowing it some measure of self-government. The public absorbs a daily barrage of news images that over time help to define its sense of place in society and within a global community.” (Ward Ethics for the New Mainstream)

Through journalism, a society can pin-point or uncover issues within its political state and then debate ways to reform its institutions and face the future. There are many who believe

“journalism should be the lifeblood of a deliberative democracy.” (Ward Ethics for the New

Mainstream)

Since the journalism code of ethics is a practical application that takes moral consideration of the public and private lives of others, it can be considered a form of applied ethics because it “. . . deal[s] with the articulation and application of principles to problems. In

4 applied ethics, we are actors who do ethics, arguing for certain principles and values and their application in controversial cases.” (Ward The New Media Ethics)

One of the most widespread journalistic codes was developed by The Society of

Professional Journalists. Its preamble states that "public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues." (SPJ)

Although there are minor differences between the ethical codes of specific publications, most share the same basic principles: accuracy, objectivity, truthfulness, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability.

This framework is reflective of a Kantian, deontological, duty-based approach to ethics, but an overlap with many other ethical frameworks exist. From a deontological perspective, the approaches to the ‘ideal’— honest, objective, and transparent — in journalism are examined. ​ ​ ​ ​ Sergey G. Korkonosenko, the author of the journal Deontology of Journalism as a Field of ​ Moral Choice for a Professional, examines the concept of journalism deontology, ethics, and ​ morality. The author argues that a deontological approach may be more of an ideal than a reality and that deontology, in this case, becomes something more utilitarian-pragmatic:

“The normative treatment of deontology operates with a concept of the duty. In our version the key concept is the due. The difference, on fluent impression, can seem ​ ​ insignificant, but we think it to be a basic one. In the first case, the emphasis is done on obligations of the press, in the second case – on the necessary and true behaviour, without which the life will lose its natural order and vector of development. If so, deontology becomes an area where the ideal is being formed on the basis of laws one has got to know.” (Korkonosenko 1724)

The ‘due’ in journalism is a necessity to be understood and accepted by people and included by ​ ​ them in their personal moral outlook as well as their own strategy of behavior.

5 Video Journalism

One of the issues regarding video journalism and newsroom convergence is that of a larger workload on individual journalists. Konstantinos Saltzis, author of Inside the Changing ​ ​ ​ ​ Newsroom: Journalists' Responses to Media Convergence says that “in television news, new ​ production equipment has brought the promise of single-person newsgathering based on the idea of multi-skilled crewing.” (Saltzis) This expectation could take a toll on their ethical decision making as multiskilling becomes an expectation. This is because “multiskilling in newsrooms is aimed at cost reduction efficiency improvements, but at the same time raises significant concerns about declining quality in news output . . .” (Saltzis)

However, a lack of reform in the expectations and ethical standards remains one of the larger issues in video journalism. According to Ess, “much of the ethical reflection on digital media . . . arose alongside technologies themselves.”(Ess 1) Although this is true to some extent within the realm of video journalism, these new ethical questions have yet to be translated into a code of ethics relating to the one developed for print journalism.

This is an ethical dilemma that also reflects the three challenges digital media tends to present, according to Ess, author of Digital Media Ethics: ​ ​

1. “They raise for us ethical problems already familiar from our use of more

traditional media.”

Motion and sound set the video apart, from other mediums. While ethical guidelines,

such as “minimize harm,” or “seek truth and report it,” still apply to contemporary

6 journalism, when you add in these other elements it becomes harder to live up to some of

the standards of the code while remaining transparent, which creates more opportunities

for ethical lapses.

2. “These familiar difficulties are now sometimes accompanied by new ​ wrinkles.”

There are more opportunities for ethical lapses. New questions arose as editing brings the

ability to easily present things completely out-of-context, something very hard to do with

analog videotape.

3. “New media may present us with distinctively new ethical problems.” ​ New technology is unpredictable. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an example of something

we can’t fully predict until it becomes normative. These things may be impossible to

predict now but journalism should be reactive to new media and digital technology.

One of the biggest issues that journalists should be considering now with video-based journalism and photo-based journalism is whether a journalist or a citizen journalist used editing software to alter the photograph or video (e.g., to add an object to the picture or take an object out). Being honest in your reporting is outlined in all ethical codes but is it clear when editing software stretches the truth, is there a limit to what can be altered, and is it clear to journalists who work in those forms? According to Ward, “the manipulation of images is so tempting that mainstream newsrooms have fired a string of photojournalists over the past decade to discourage

7 fraudulent practices.” (Ward Digital Media Ethics) Changing the meaning or content of the image, so as to mislead viewers, is considered unethical, but at what point does that happen?

The line between “a technical change and a change in meaning is not always clear. An image-maker can enhance the colors of a photo until it is quite unlike the original picture of the object or the event.” (Ward Digital Media Ethics)

Why Changes Need to Be Made

Power Mass media outlets, whether broadcast, print, or digital, hold a lot of power. They have the power to reach out and greatly influence their many viewers or readers. This social and institutional power can be used for a number of things: persuasion as we see in advertising, or propaganda, as practiced, for example, in authoritarian states and those without strong democratic safeguards. When analyzing the media’s power, it is also important to note the power of access, “it has been shown that power is generally based on special access to valued social resources. This is quite literally also true for access to public discourse, for example, that of the mass media.” (Dijk 11)

Some societies are much more vulnerable to an abusive influence because . . .

“[The] media scene is dominated by either state-owned or private outlets, or if there is a balanced mixture of the two. Particularly if the media scene is dominated by the state, there is often little or no check on media behavior. Another important variable is the receptivity of the population to diversified independent media. This is often taken for granted in developed countries, but it is important to recognize that in many societies there is little or no history of media diversity and independence.” (Frohardt 3)

8 The United States, however, has a wide range of publications independent from the

government. This means that it is up to these publications to actively check themselves in

order to counterbalance influence.

Fake News

That’s not to say that in Western Society viewers are completely protected from news with an overt or covert ideological bent or other types of bias, manipulative presentation, or even outright propaganda. There is no denying that video-based digital tools could be used to produce

“fake news” that is very believable. For these reasons, a digital-specific journalistic code of ethics is more important than ever. The New York Times’ Claire Wardle, an expert in online manipulation said, “when anything can be fake, it becomes much easier for the guilty to dismiss the truth as fake.” (Wardle)

Today, the public easily dismisses information as lies. Even something as simple as slightly altering the playback speed of a video or using basic photoshop edits, adds to this distrust. Wardle responds to a recent phenomenon known as ‘deepfakes.’ Deepfakes are synthetic media that use artificial intelligence (AI) to replace a person in an existing image or video with someone else's likeness. In a piece produced by The New York Times, she discusses ​ ​ the ways that deepfakes sometimes have triggered fears for national security. In actuality, this

“weaponization of context” (Wardle) is not new at all. She explains that the viewer's perception of context may be altered even without complex video manipulation, such as deepfakes.

Media outlets frequently blend news, commentary, and entertainment as a technique to institute bias while making their content appear as impartial news to viewers. Fox News, although well-known for its conservative agitprop and right-wing political agenda, claims a

9 distinct divide between its consideration of “news” and “news opinion,” – which includes the notorious “Fox and Friends” roundtable. In terms of journalism and journalistic integrity, the most dangerous aspect of their “news” content is the distinction between factual reporting and editorial opinion, which has been obliterated and slanted to support a particular political agenda.

This kind of behavior is even more prevalent in Fox’s present broadcast content. To those who recognize Fox’s tactics, the media outlet is so clearly manipulative of its audience. The station makes great effort to conflate commentary and selected bits of news to fit the desired narrative, including a presentation that resembles a typical network newscast. When Tucker

Carlson sits behind the newsroom desk with the “Fox News Channel” logo displayed in the lower-left corner of the screen and says, “immigration makes our own country poor and dirtier and more divided,” it seems that his words certainly breach the journalism code of ethics when he intentionally shares his opinion and blurs the line between his opinion and factual news.

Television broadcast news has a wide variety of tools at its disposal that can influence the public’s perception. Word choice, tone, and visuals can distort the truth, so the ethical reporter needs to take extra care not to mislead the audience.

Agenda-ridden reporting that engenders skepticism of viewers “can divert audiences away from legacy news and information outlets, but more alarmingly they can misinform and confuse. The opportunity exists to circulate rumors and untruths, some of which are motivated by private interests and narrow agendas.” (Gade)

Citizen Journalism

According to Ward, “Many people believe, ‘What is journalism?’ or ‘Is he or she doing journalism?’ is a more important question than whether they can call themselves a journalist.”

10 (Ward Digital Media Ethics) The accessibility of digital media has empowered a new type of journalist, the citizen journalist, who produces their own content to publish or contracts with an established publication. Are these content providers considered journalists? Is that even the right question?

The answer depends on whether one takes a skeptical, empirical, or normative approach.

The skeptical approach reflects the habit of journalists to question everything. “Skeptically, one dismisses the question itself as unimportant. For example, one might say that anyone can be a journalist, and it is not worth arguing over who gets to call themselves a journalist. One is skeptical about attempts to define journalism.” (Ward Digital Media Ethics)

Professional journalism is not the only form of journalism affected by this new media.

Developing one’s own brand online is easier than ever and allows people to produce videos saying just about anything they like. Ess describes contemporary citizen journalism and democracy as “expressing significant transformations of our lives in the digital age.”

In the past . . .

“ broadcast and mass media such as national and corporate TV networks and newspaper, journalism - and thereby journalistic practices and ethics - was almost exclusively the concern of journalists themselves and the institutions that employed them. These days, by contrast, what counts as news- most especially as distributed online - is much more diffuse.” (Ess 1)

Ess argues that the citizen journalist must start thinking through the ethical consequences of journalism’s transformation in the distribution and consumption of news. Journalists are supposed to be responsible and verify that they receive media from credible sources. Could trusting media sent by citizen journalists be an ethical lapse? Potentially, but Ess argues that it could “help introduce and expand democracy. . .” (Ess 15) This is because it invites more people

11 to participate and collaborate with news institutions, potentially widening the media’s scope, helping them gain new perspectives and diversify.

A relevant case study is highlighted in a research paper titled “Journalism in the Age of

Social Media.” Author Jennifer Alejandro states that “On July 7, 2005, within six hours of the

London bombings, the BBC received more than 1,000 photographs, 20 pieces of amateur video,

4,000 text messages and 20,000 emails.” She quotes the former head of global news for the BBC

Richard Sambrook, who had written that “people were participating in our coverage in a way we had never seen before. By the next day, our main evening TV newscast began with a package edited entirely from video sent in by viewers.” (Sambrook) Now, the BBC has developed its

“UGC [or] user-generated content center to process information, photos, and text coming in from the general public.” (Alejandro) She explains that newsrooms are making space for citizen journalists as an attempt to become more in tune with the community. Which is a great example of how citizen journalism can be utilized. However, professional journalists could run into issues in the future if no procedure exists to confirm the authenticity of these videos. One issue is whether newsrooms can trust the easily obtained images taken by citizens and citizen journalists.

News outlets have no way of identifying the sender and the authenticity of the image with context to date, location, and time of the event in question, other than the claims of the sender.

Ward states that “newsrooms need to put in place a process for citizen-supplied material, which may be bogus or biased.” Ward then asks, “how shall sources be identified? How much vetting is necessary for different sorts of stories? Should citizen contributors be made aware of the newsroom’s editorial standards?” (Ward Digital Media Ethics) Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to these questions and publications have shared no such standard.

12 Ethical Dilemmas in Video-Based and Digital Journalism

Unfortunately, a clear resolution to any of these ethical dilemmas does not exist presently. After evaluating all the ethical issues and ways video — especially video on the ​ ​ internet — and digital media have affected journalism, it is clear that news media requires a ​ ​ radical rethinking of the principles and standards of journalism ethics.

Journalists and researchers will have to find the best way to incorporate platforms without compromising journalistic ethics and standards, as well as find ways to better serve their expanding community. Video and digital-based reporting gives journalists a chance to widen their reach and increase accessibility and creativity. It has the potential to be a very powerful tool for positive change. A new set of ethical guidelines, as well as more strict government regulation on platform integrity and liability, would be required to assuage such worries.

One study conducted by J.C. Suárez Villegas, Professor of Journalistic Ethics and

Deontology at the Universidad de Sevilla in Spain, gathered quantitative research about the ethical and deontological aspects of online journalism. Villegas’ study could be a good model used to approach digital journalism. Villegas surveyed several journalists asking them the following questions and having them rank how they would agree or disagree with the handling of each ethical statement. (Villegas)

Some of the questions posed by Villegas are:

1. What degree of influence do the following factors have, in what you consider to be an

ethical exercise of journalism?

13 2. Do you consider these activities to be an ethical dilemma?

3. Indicate how the media company you work for asks you to do the following activities.

Each question was then followed by specific ethical dilemmas. This study could be repurposed for developing a new code of ethics for contemporary journalism and more specifically, journalism that incorporates video.

This research could be used to develop a new code of ethics that reflects contemporary media and addresses at least some of the ethical concerns around the work of multimedia journalists, specifically ones who use digital video as a storytelling medium.

With the rise of new media comes change to long-standing institutions. To remain impactful in the public eye and continue to be an example of ethical integrity, journalists must be flexible, adjusting to major adaptations within the field. The development of the digital world has shaken up the process of information, and new standards and guidelines should be reflective of these changes. Understanding the power of mass media, the issue of “fake news,” and the potential impact of citizen journalism are just the first steps to developing a more relevant and comparable ethical guideline for journalists who produce digital video. There are a number of ethical dilemmas that unfortunately are still so open-ended, leaving journalists free to translate the current code of ethics into a new medium however they like. Through quantitative research, more of these questions would be answered, and journalists would have a much stronger reference for practices that would be considered unethical when producing digital video. The ​ New Media and Video Journalism Ethics Survey was developed in order to answer some of these ​

14 questions as well as to understand and assess the current standards and expectations upheld by professional journalists right now.

New Media and Video Journalism Ethics Survey

Method

The New Media Ethics Survey was shared with many journalists, both student and ​ ​ professional, who work in various media, as well as documentary filmmakers. Survey takers were asked to disclose in which journalism medium they have experience working as well as the outlet or media companies they have worked for. The survey was designed to gain perspective on the role new media plays in journalism and the ways journalists are adapting to it, using it, and understanding any potential grey areas, such as legal issues or unclear ethical standards and expectations. The survey was shared on social media (Facebook and Twitter) as well as emailed directly to some participants.

Survey Questions (not including demographic questions) ​

1. Ethical dilemmas are inherent to the nature of journalism and documentary filmmaking 2. Some video journalism or documentaries use audience persuasion techniques. 3. All media outlets have the same ethical standard. 4. Video journalism increases the publics' perception of the objectivity of the media and the information they provide. 5. Should media outlets update their ethical codes to reflect the capabilities and challenges of new media? 6. Do you know of an ethical code documentarians follow when filmmaking? 7. Should a documentary be held to the same ethical standard as journalism? 8. Of the following, how much can be manipulated or changed and still be considered an ethical expression of video-based news? a. Image manipulated (photoshop)

15 b. Remixing someone else's non-copyrighted work to use c. Adjusting speeds or reversing video playback d. Choreographing the actions of subjects. 9. What are the standards the media company/ publication you work for expects in the following areas: a. Fact-checking b. use of hyperlinks to cite and contextualize online news c. acknowledging a mistake within the video d. disclosing citizen participation (footage or information sent to you from civilians) in a video e. rewriting or re-publishing a news story to increase traffic or viewers. 10. Is the anonymity of a source ethically permissible within video journalism or documentary? 11. Does your publication have a clear policy for the anonymity of sources both offline and online? 12. Do media outlets, either that you have worked for or that you are familiar with, enforce consistent rules on the anonymity of sources for all media platforms (i.e, print vs. video)? 13. Has your company or publication made clear what content would be considered illegal to use due to copyright law? 14. How much of an understanding do you have of copyright law?

Hypothesis

Based on my literary analysis, I believe that most survey takers will say that media outlets should update their ethical codes to reflect the capabilities and challenges of new media. ​ ​ Because there are a variety of journalists taking the survey, results likely will show varying opinions regarding the amount of video manipulation that is appropriate for media used to support news. For the same reasons, I believe that there are variations in journalists’ company and publication standards as it pertains to fact-checking, using hyperlinks, acknowledging mistakes and corrections, and disclosing citizen collaboration in a video. Regarding copyright and confidentiality issues, video journalists will feel as though they have a more clear understanding of media law than print journalists and online journalists will have.

16 Sampling

This study employs a basic sampling method that includes journalists from a variety of news media, both traditional and contemporary. It was filled out by people who work in the following industries: print journalism, broadcast journalism, online/digital journalism, photojournalism, and documentary filmmaking. The findings presented in this article are based on 39 completed surveys conducted from May 20 to June 1, with full-time journalists and student journalists throughout the United States.

Table 1.

The study includes online journalists as a distinct group in the overall sample because of the increased importance of online journalism and the digital multimedia aspect that are often

17 included in online stories. However, there may be some overlap with those who participate in print and online journalism because of some unclear distinctions and publications that publish both in print and digital.

Questionnaire

The survey questionnaire included a total of 26 questions and focused mostly on journalists’ use of video and new media within journalism; video reporting practices, reflection on the SPJ code of ethics and current digital technologies, perception of media usage and potential biases or legal issues, media literacy, and demographics.

● Assessing journalism practices.

● The ways video-based journalism is being used and how well journalists understand the

obligations they have to their audience when it comes to transparency.

● Any patterns or guidelines being followed when it comes to video-based journalism and

new media.

● Analyzing the current SPJ Code of Ethics in order to evaluate relevance when it comes to

new media and journalism ethics.

The surveyed journalists were able to indicate whether they thought that a response to an ethical challenge “would be justified on occasion,” that they “would not approve” such methods under any circumstances, or that they were “unsure.”

18 Demographics

Name, email, publication, journalistic medium(s) used, and education were measured for statistical control purposes. Gender, age, race, religion, political party affiliation, political leaning, income, and marital status were not measured. ​ ​

Data Digest and Analysis

This survey shed some light on how current journalists feel about modern ethical dilemmas reflected in the rise of new media. Most who participated in the survey believe that journalism, as a practice, poses ethical questions. Just over 80% of survey takers strongly agree that ethical dilemmas are inherent to the nature of journalism; this understanding of journalism's ethical complexities is reflected in the rest of the data collected. Of the journalists surveyed,

88% believe that media outlets should update their ethical codes to reflect the capabilities and ​ challenges of new media. This shows that there is a perceived need for ethical reform. This analysis is supported by 87% of survey respondents who do not think that all media outlets have the same ethical standard.

Interestingly, despite 85% of survey respondents strongly agreeing that video journalism and documentary films use audience persuasion techniques, over 70% agree or somewhat agree that video journalism increases the public’s perception of the media. So, although most agree that video journalism increases the public's trust in news outlets, an overwhelming majority also feel that there is some stretching or romanticization of the truth.

An important question asked in the survey pertains to documentary filmmaking and whether this form of video-based journalism is considered journalism. Close to two-thirds of

19 survey respondents believe that a documentary should be held to the same ethical standard as journalism, while nearly a quarter do not. One particular respondent felt that documentary should instead be held to a higher standard: “a documentary should endure beyond its time and place, have relevance to people anywhere and at any time.”

However, many documentarians expressed that a one-size-fits-all ethical guide or written code does not exist within their industry. According to some of the surveyed documentary filmmakers, certain companies do have standards that documentarians are expected to adhere to, such as:

○ Don’t put sources in danger.

○ Informed consent of people represented

○ Aim for objectivity.

○ Use verifiable sources

When it comes to new media manipulation, there are no set rules that journalists are required to follow other than ethical standards set by a journalist’s publication and by a journalist themself

(or their peers). The heat map below shows the variation in opinion based on the type of video manipulation and the type of journalist surveyed.

Table 2.

20 The individual bar charts below show the percentage of each answer (0-5) for each category.

Table 3.

Table 4.

Table 5.

21 Table 6.

Overall, the variety of answers shows that a clearer ethical guide must exist for media companies to have similar ethical standards. When asked about their company or publication’s standards for fact-checking, most survey respondents emphasized the importance of fact-checking as a journalistic practice. Most explained that stories are vetted for facts and legal issues. However, some survey takers expressed that fact-checking was not applicable to their work. Out of those 3 survey takers, 2 are documentary filmmakers and one is a video-based journalist. There were also two others who did not answer the question; both are documentary filmmakers.

When asked about standards for using hyperlinks to cite and contextualize news, all print and online journalists expressed that they use hyperlinks as part of their practice at least in some circumstances. In contrast, 47% of video journalists and documentary filmmakers did not answer the question or said that it was not applicable. This response is most likely because one cannot hyperlink within a video. However, one documentarian suggested to always include hyperlinks,

“Maybe not in the video itself, but on hand, if needed or in a description, if the video is posted online.”

22 When it comes to acknowledging a mistake in a video, the survey showed a variety of answers. Some suggested republishing the video, indicating corrections in a later broadcast, or adding a disclaimer to the description, website, or on social media. For the sake of transparency, doing all of these would be appropriate. It appears that the standard is dependent on the location of the video, which should be considered when publishing a correction.

Regarding the acknowledgment of citizen participation, every person who answered believes that the sourced material should be accredited in some way, such as through subtitles, ending credits, or lower thirds. The style of credits can vary based on format and video type.

When it comes to rewriting or re-publishing a news story to increase traffic or viewers, almost every surveyed journalist said they do not do this. Only a few said they might recycle a story if the topic becomes relevant again.

As shown by the table below, most journalists believed that the anonymity of a source is ethically permissible within video journalism or documentary, however, 10.3% believed that anonymity of sources is only appropriate within video journalism specifically. This supports the idea that under certain circumstances, anonymity can be an appropriate course of action.

Table 7.

23 More than half of participants believe that media outlets enforce consistent rules on the anonymity of sources for all media platforms. Since so many agreed that anonymity could be ethically permissible within video journalism, consistency across different media outlets is crucial in order to protect the source’s identity as well as to remain transparent about the sourcing of information.

Table 8.

Understanding legal implications and repercussions is important when working in digital forms.

A lack of understanding of something like copyright law can be disastrous for a journalist and a journalist’s company or publication. Of those surveyed, over half feel that their company has made clear the content that would be considered illegal to use due to copyright law. 35% of people do not believe their company has made this clear and the rest were unsure.

24 Table 9.

Participants were asked to rank their individual understanding of copyright law. Most journalists surveyed fell in the middle, expressing that they have some understanding of usage rights. Approximately one-third of survey takers say they have a pretty good understanding, and the rest either fall in the middle or do not think they have a very good understanding.

Table 10.

25 This supports the conclusion that media training is not something that is heavily emphasized by some companies and that the individual journalist is expected to develop an understanding of these legal matters on their own.

Suggested Improvements

Upon reflection, there are some areas where the data collection could have been stronger.

Not all journalists who participated in the experiment have the same level of experience. Some worked for professional institutions while others worked for publications associated with their university. Although I required survey takers to share what publication they worked for, had I asked everyone to disclose whether they were a profession or student journalists I could have accessed the current professional development of my respondents. This would have allowed me to separate my data pool without any false negatives occurring.

Organizing the data from the write-in questions was a challenge. Since every person wrote a different answer, the software (Google sheets) could not organize or group the answers; it had to be done manually. If the experiment were to be conducted with a larger pool, a rephrasing of the write-in questions to multiple-choice is recommended.

One thing to note is that the majority of people who filled out the survey are

Chicago-based journalists or have some sort of connection to Chicago. Most were those who saw me distribute the survey on my personal social media page. If the experiments were to be conducted again I would suggest striving for a more geographically diverse candidate pool. Also,

26 this experiment was conducted from a Western lens and does not discuss journalism outside

North America and North American policy.

Conclusion

Having a code of ethics that encompasses the wide scope of digital media and attempts to look toward the future of video capabilities is a challenge. A quick-fix solution to the ethical complexities that the contemporary multimedia journalists face does not exist. However, some ethics questions can be answered now and serve as a guide for the future, just as the SPJ Code of

Ethics has served as a guide for this experiment. Below is a mock-up of a potential Digital Media

Ethics Code, based on the literary analysis and data gathered in this survey. This code does not discuss topics that are already outlined in the SPJ Code of Ethics. ​ ​

27 New media and video ethics PREAMBLE: As we look toward the future of digital and video capabilities, news organizations have been called upon to expand their code of ethics to provide the working journalist with a clear understanding of the expectations they face in the name of transparency and fairness. This guide attempts to set a foundation for ethical content creation. Its practice by all people in all forms of media will help lessen the public’s scrutiny of the news.

A FOUNDATION FOR JOURNALISTS: NEW MEDIA ETHICS RULES AND GUIDELINES: Digital video and broadcast journalists Minimal video manipulation should be part of the video should refrain from using the following journalists’ process during filming or in post-production. audience persuasion techniques: • Not clearly differentiating news from ACCEPTABLE: news commentary: All news commentary • Color correction. should provide a disclaimer at the • Asking a subject to repeat something they have already said. beginning of a segment. • Using or remixing work without copyright restriction unless • Music that is not considered natural one has a license or permission to do so. sound or directly referenced in the story • Adjusting playback or video speed as long as it does not should not be used in order to convey affect the speech or movement of a person or change the emotion in the following: broadcast understanding or meaning of the video. packages, newscasts. • Blurring the face of a subject in order to protect their • Video journalists will remain objective identity. in their reporting as well as during post- production in order to deliver a product NOT ACCEPTABLE: that directly reflects the story both in context and magnitude. • Altering someone’s appearance (other than the blurring of faces). • Adding any people or objects into a video using DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER manipulation technology. DISCLAIMER: • Remixing or repurposing someone else’s work without Documentarians should hold themselves permission or licensing. to the same ethical standards as journalists • Adjusting video speed or playback in order to change when it comes to objectivity. However, the context of someone’s words or change their perceived in terms of storytelling, they must have demeanor. more room to take creative liberties when • The anonymity of a source can be ethically permissible it comes to music, story-telling structure, in some circumstances: in order to protect the identity of illustrative or representative imagery, and someone at risk. Creators should discuss with their editors style. before publishing. • When videos or images are sent in by citizen journalists, they should be vetted by a manipulation expert or verified by a secondary source. • All facts should be stated by expert sources or be backed and confirmed by at least two credible sources. • When materials are sourced, they must be properly credited to the owner, either in a lower third as the video appearance or in an ending credit sequence • All professional publications and production companies should require its full-time staff, journalists, camera people, digital media teams, producers, and others involved in such activities, to complete a media literacy seminar. This seminar Image courtesy of Caleb Oquendo via Pexels will include a discussion about ethical standards, journalism law, usage rights, copyright law, and anonymity. Citations

Alejandro, Jennifer. “Journalism in the Age of Social Media.” Reuters University for the Study of Journalism: Reuters Institute Fellowship Paper University of Oxford, 2010, mediaforum.md/upload/Journalism%`20in%20the%20Age%20of%20Social%20Media.pdf.

Ess, Charles. Digital Media Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2009.

Frohardt, Mark, and Jonathan Temin. Use and Abuse of Media in Vulnerable Societies. www.usip.org/sites/default/files/sr110.pdf.

Gade, Peter J., and Wilson Lowrey. Changing the News: The Forces Shaping Journalism in Uncertain Times. Routledge, 2011.

Korkonosenko, Sergey G. “Deontology of Journalism as a Field of Moral Choice for a Professional.” Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, vol. 12, 2012.

Sambrook, Richard. “Citizen Journalism and the BBC.” Nieman Reports, 15 Dec. 2005, niemanreports.org/articles/citizen-journalism-and-the-bbc/.

Saltzis, Konstantinos, and Roger Dickinson. “Inside the Changing Newsroom: Journalists' Responses to Media Convergence.” Aslib Proceedings, vol. 60, no. 3, 2008, pp. 216–228., ​ ​ doi:10.1108/00012530810879097.

“SPJ Code of Ethics - Society of Professional Journalists.” Society of Professional Journalists - Improving and Protecting Journalism since 1909, www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp. ​ ​ ​ Teun, Dijk A. “Political Communication in Action.” www.discourses.org/OldArticles/Power%20and%20the%20news%20media.pdfhttp://www. ​ Villegas, J.C. Suarez. “Ethical and Deontological Aspects of Online Journalism. Their Perception by Journalists.” JC Suárez Villegas (2015): "Ethical and Deontological Aspects of Online Journalism. Their Perception by Journalists". Revista Latina De Comunicación Social, 70, Pp. 91 to 109., 1 Jan. 1970, www.revistalatinacs.org/070/paper/1036us/06en.html.

Ward, Stephen J. A. “Ethics for the New Mainstream.” In The New Journalist: Roles, Skills, and Critical Thinking, eds. Paul Benedetti, Tim Currie and Kim Kierans, pp. 313-326. Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications, 2010.

29 Ward, Stephen J. A. “Digital Media Ethics.” Center for Journalism Ethics, ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/resources/digital-media-ethics/.

Ward, Stephen J. A. “The New Media Ethics.” Ethics and the Media, pp. 207–244., doi:10.1017/cbo9780511977800.007.

Wardle, Claire. “This Video May Not Be Real.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 14 Aug. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/opinion/deepfakes-adele-disinformation.html.

30