Log in to StudySoup
Get Full Access to UW - Com 468 - Class Notes - Week 7
Join StudySoup for FREE
Get Full Access to UW - Com 468 - Class Notes - Week 7

Already have an account? Login here
Reset your password

s/ns uw

s/ns uw


School: University of Washington
Department: Communications
Course: Media Ethics
Professor: Douglas underwood
Term: Fall 2016
Tags: ethics, journalism, Media, media ethics, digital media, digital media ethics, and journalism ethics
Cost: 25
Name: COM 468 Ethics Week 7 Notes
Description: These notes cover both presentations for Tuesday and Thursday of week 7 along with notes on our Professor's comments. There are no quiz section notes as we did not have section this Friday.
Uploaded: 11/12/2016
10 Pages 284 Views 1 Unlocks

Who has rights to what?

How do we justify it?

All of us have probably downloaded illegal music or videos but the question is to what extend if any is it acceptable?

Week 7 Lecture 12 Tuesday, November 8, 2016 Group presentations  Chapter 4 : Friendship, democracy and citizen journalism  Friendships as they relate to social media (social network sites SNS) ∙ Easier for peo9ple to connect each other as well as to isolate someone  ∙ Self- commodification  ∙ IndivIf you want to learn more check out rel 108 uiuc
Don't forget about the age old question of What are the challenges of a parole officer?
Don't forget about the age old question of rel 108 uiuc
If you want to learn more check out rel 108 uiuc
If you want to learn more check out nxiem
If you want to learn more check out What is the main function of the digestive system?
idual emphases toward relational emphases  ∙ Ethics virtue  ∙ The impact of secondary orality- textuality on people  ∙ How far the relational self as work in SNS can be dependent on the affirmation and assurance of  others  ∙ Redesign friendship online  Democracy: the importance of dialogue and devote shaped by rational argument, diver narratives, and  ethical commitments to equality, freedom, solidarity, and perspective-taking  Citizen journalism  New sources have changed  The rest of us has the chance to receive different news as well as to generate news  Ethical rights, responsibilities, and perhaps virtues  Chapter summary  How friendship is dramatically amplified by SNS and perhaps threatened by affordances of SNS Ethics of forms of journalism have changed and been shaped democratic ends  Early confidence in democratizing powers of digital media has been diminished Facts of the case  2009 Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad was re elected into office in what many believed to be an  illegitimate election  On June 20, 2009 Neda Agha Soltan, a young iranian philosophy student was shot in the chest during  clashes between anti-government demonstrators and government security forces  Her death was captured on video and posted to you tube, where it eventually went viral  The twitter hashtag #neda was created  Time magazine said that it was probably the most witnessed death in human history Neda was lifted up as a martyr in the cause of the opposition to the Iranian regime . Demonstrators  carried photographs of her  Unfortunately for university English professor. Neda Soltani several western news outlets including Fox  news and CNN pulled her Facebook profile photo to use in coverage of the event  Which lead to a massive number of friend requests to her Facebook and arrest and detention by the  Iranian government which wanted her to help in their efforts to smear the video as a hoax  When she refused she was accused of spying for the west  She has since escaped iran and is struggling to rebuild her life  Citizen journalism vs major news outlets  ∙ Ethics of sharing the photo vs publishing the photo by the outlet  Values  ∙ Empathy sympathy - ∙ Respect for others  ∙ Res citizen Principles  ∙ Golden rule  ∙ Ethical teachings of Jesus  ∙ Prophetic journalism  ∙ Laws of nation  ∙ Milton- self-righting principle- truth will prevail  ∙ Locke - right of revolution, natural rights - right to opinion - ethics is balancing individual and social  concerns  ∙ Hobbes - humans are selfish brutish and violent  ∙ James - violence could possibly be the most effective in reaction and action  ∙ Marx - ends justify the means  Loyalties  ∙ Society - connected by social media and more aware of events around the world  ∙ Self - feels good to be informed and share info  ∙ Public's right to know  ∙ Feelings of audience - invoke sympathy and empathy- shock factor  Citizens have Less loyalties than journalists ∙ More anonymity  Decision  ∙ Ethical - see continued photo ∙ 1st amendment rights grans us freedom of speech and one important reason why we have legal  protection here is because is it imperative that as citizens we are able to evaluate and criticize  government  ∙ The sedition act of 1798 made it a crime to publish anything scandalous or malicious about the  government. Truth was not a defense, as truth is often more damaging  ∙ Protection even covers falsehoods so that we do not self-censor out of fear of facing  imprisonment or fines just because of inaccuracy. Give voice to the voiceless  ∙ No actual mallice- meaning both news organizations and the citizen journalists would have had to  have published the information knowing that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth  ∙ We do and we should hold professional media organizations to higher fact checking and accuracy  standards. SPJ stresses correction of mistakes. Bloggers code of ethics stresses transparency  ∙ This may have been an honest mistake made by misinformation, likely not helped by the fact that  the event took place in Iran making it difficult to ge the story  ∙ Intentions were arguably good- raise awareness. News outlets did not share the graphic video  Professor notes  Reckless disregard- people post the photo of someone they thought had been shot but not the right  person- Common names - beware  Rolling stone- Jury ruled against them for actual malice (professional mistakes) - reposted the story on  the website without changing- just said there was issues about truth (story about sexual assault)  Free speech issues in the US vs other countries  1st amendment - privileges in the US and not in other countries even if you're from the US  "Internet can be in itself a weapon"- Underwood  Do no harm balance that we try to bring to free speech and free press  Internet now has much more consequences now for false information and harm  Potential for using the internet for fear and make people self-censor  Doctrine of unintended consequences  Things happen for one heroic and ethical reason and they turn out in a different way  When we do things in the US they may not have the same outcome in other countries  Chapter 3 copying and distributing  To get us thinking  All of us have probably downloaded illegal music or videos but the question is to what extend if any is it  acceptable? How do we justify it? In what situations?  Imagine this: Your friend is starting a band that's struggling to gain an audience and doesn't make  enough money to support its members. They released a CD on their website priced at $10. You're no  stranger to illegally downloading music but you want to support the band so you pay full price for your  legal copy of the CD Now imagine this:  Another friend who likes the band's sample track offered free on the website asks if you'd mind making  a CD of your copy of the album so that he can either:  1. Highlight the band's music at an upcoming party where he's going to provide music- in part so that  the album might generate a few more sales 2. Make copies of the album to give to friends of his who are also interested in the music  3. Put a copy of the album on his computer so that it is available to others on the internet. Using one  of the current P2P file sharing networks  4. All of the above  Intellectual property Who has rights to what?  Three main schools of thought:  1. United states and Europe  2. Copyleft/ FLOSS 3. Confucian/ Ubuntu US/ Europe: Greater stress on individual and exclusive property rights  FLOSS/ Copyleft in the middle  Confucian/ Ubuntu : greater stress on community inclusive property rights Western Thought: United States  ∙ A utilitarian ethic is applied to intellectual property law ∙ Protecting intellectual property encourages artists to keep creating products that benefit the  larger public good over the long run  ∙ Because of these laws about rights, a strong financial eward encourages authors, artists, software  engineers, etc to innovate ∙ However, those rights should not extend further than what is good for the public  ∙ The outcome is often that industries have the most at stake and the interests of the individual  agent become secondary  Western thought: Europe  ∙ Copyright is an intrinsic right of the individual and recognition of that person's identity or  personhood  ∙ Creative work is an artifact that has been invested with some measure of the author's personality  or that reflects individuality  ∙ Out of respect for the autonomy and humanity of the artist, that artifact deserves legal  recognition ∙ On the international stage, US and Europe compete in these approaches; right now US dominates  An Example: Taylor Swift  Her views on Spotify and streaming music  She believes that valuable things like music should be paid for and not free and have protection as an  individual artist Taylor Swift has trade marked some of her lyrics  Western Thought: Copyleft and Free Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS)  ∙ Both open sourrce and fee software movemtns support the development of software to be made  freely available for others to copy, use, modify, and redistribute  ∙ The justification for this freedom is that the benefits of computer software and information  shared broadly and equitably over the entire community are wide-reaching ∙ These approaches ae focused on ideas of inclusive property rights (as opposed to exclusive rights)  ∙ Even though an individual maintains owner rights, those rights are inclusive  Ubuntu/ Confucian  Some shared characteristics  ∙ Individuals are relational and centrally independent. These traditions downplay the importance of  the individual in favor of contributing to the larger community  ∙ What counts as property is inclusive - the rights belong to the community  Confucian  ∙ Emphasizes the emulation of revered classics  ∙ Copying is an activity that expresses respect for the work of the artist/ author  ∙ A master artist is motivated mostly by the desire to benefit others with their work rather than  personally profit ∙ A focus on personal benefits would mean restricting access to your work ( perhaps for people who  could not afford to pay) rather than seeing your work widely distributed  Ubuntu ∙ An actual software created by open sources of developers with the belief that everyone should  have access to the best technologies  ∙ It gets its name from the African concept of Ubuntu 'humanity towards others' and the belief in a  universal bond of sharing that connects humanity  ∙ Emphasis on inclusive rather than exclusive property rights for the sake of the well being of the  community which is the underlying characteristic of African cultures and confucian and buddhist  traditions  ∙ It does not mean the complete loss of individual- still retain significance exactly because of their  potential to interact with others in ways that contribute to community harmony  Case notes  ∙ In July of 2009 Joel Tenenbaum was charged with a civil lawsuit from the RIAA (recording industry  association of america) for illegally downloading and distributing 30 songs (Copyright  infringement)  ∙ Joel tenenbaum was a 25 year old grad student at the time of the start of the case and pled that  he did not understand the magnitude of copyright laws  ∙ Originally approached in 2003 for similar charges, amounting in a $3,500 fine which escalated over  the years as Tenenbaum refused to pay and tried to work out a less expensive deal  ∙ He lost the trial in 2009 and was fined $675,000  ∙ The fine was reduced to $67,000 by the judge in 2010 ∙ Appealed by both sides  ∙ Erinstated to a $675,000 fine in 2012∙ Tenenbaum filed for bankrupcy in 2015 and the court discharged the $657,000 fine in March of  2016  Values  Respect for others  Fairness Accountability  Empathy/sympathy Responsible citizenship Balance Honest  Loyalties  Shareholders of the media company  Professional reputation  Self/career  Society  Industry  Publc right to know  Principles  Locke - property rights and responsible citizens  Rousseau - good of the community over property rigts is good of community Mil utilitaianism  Karma  Machiavelli - ends justify the means  Laws of nation Hebrew scriptures  Aristotle - individual over collective  Confucious  Mideval teachings of christiantity - fear of god, fear of law  Teachings of jesus  Conclusion:  Was the $675,000 amount sought by the RIAA justifiable?  We do not believe it was justifiable because as a college student, there was no way he could pay it; they  could have sought a reformative approach rather than a punitive one- for ex" having him educate others  Since the RIAA couldn't possibly track down and pursue everyone, was it fair to only seek out and sue a  few individuals We decided that it was not fair for a few "sacrificial lambs' to bear the brrunt of the consequences when  millions of other people were doing the same thing. It might have made more sense for the RIAA to go  after the file-sharing companies, not individual users  Rergardless of the law, do you think it is ethical or unethical to copy and distribute music? There is no right answer, ethical values aere not absolute, they ae ingrained in our culture. Even within a  culture, there can be differences of belief from person to person and between generations with regarrds  to who has which rights and who should benefit in which ways.  Week 7 Lecture 13 Thursday, November 10, 2016 Chapter 6  Ethical frameworks  ∙ Utilitarianism  ∙ Deontology - western religious- quality to promise keeping and basic human rights to be sacrificed  ∙ Meta-theoretical frameworks - relativism, absolutism  ∙ Feminist ethics - comprehensive and inclusive way- Carol Gillian, ethics of care- prioritizes  emotional bonds and take responsibility of themselves  ∙ Virtue ethics - make the good decision  ∙ Confucian ethics  ∙ African tradition: ubuntu Potter box- case 7 media's foul ball  ∙ 2003 Chicago cubs were five outs from advancing to the world series  ∙ 26 year old fan, Steve Bartman, tried to grab a foul ball, preventing outfileder Moises Alou from  catching it  ∙ Within minutes Steve Bartman's name appeared online  ∙ At the game there was no mega tron or giant screen to identify Bartman however the media made  his name and face known to the pubilc by playing the video over and over again ∙ Some of the first media outlets to identify him was the Chiago sun and tribune  ∙ Within minuets of the game being over all of Bartman's personal information was online- name  addrress  ∙ The media swarmed his house  ∙ Bartman changed his identity and went under witness protection ∙ He was traumatized  Discussion questions  Given the potential danger to the man, should he be id by mediaDo you think it was ethical for the media to replay the clip over and over again Do you think it is ethical for the MLB to all ow Bartman's personal address and other personal  information to be leaked in chatrooms Values  ∙ Respect for others - privacy ∙ Fairness: is it fair for the media to blame the loss of the game on Bartman? ∙ Accountability: the media is now accountable for Bartman's need to go into witness protection  ∙ Empathy/sympathy: Bartman is still traumatized and did not want any involvement in the recent  win of the Cubs world series  Principles  ∙ Do no harm- journalists should always consider possible harm and minimize harm  ∙ Golden rule- anyone could have been Bartman, other people's hands ∙ Golden mean - there is a way to cover what happened without causing as much harm  ∙ Kant - despite the buzz of the game, id him for the sake of replays, the harm is not justified  Loyalties  ∙ Feelings of audience -game attendees, public ∙ Industry  ∙ Public's right to know  ∙ Professional reputation  Ethical frameworks  ∙ Virtue ethics- importance of other people , don’t undermine values for fame or fortune  ∙ Deontology - basic human rights and promise keeping not overlooked  Discussion  What is your decision in the case?  Do you think that in today's world of social media, if this incident were to happen again would this be  such a big issue, and would it have a lasting effect?  The case occurred in 2003, no Facebook yet  Our conclusion ∙ Unethical  ∙ Media replayed the clip multiple times, zoomed in on his face, and published his name - conscious  decision  ∙ Story could have been reported in other ways  ∙ Had to take major precautions to protect himself- victims need to be protected  Chapter 5 digital sex and games  Porn reaches all corners of the internet If you have a fetish, there web has it  The scope of porn has expanded in scope from 70 s beaver films to virtual reality porn  Different countries have different standards for what is sexually explicit  Denmark vs India  Porn has clashed with feminist ideals since the 60s  Women are often the target and tools for heterosexual male pleasure  Porn has made its way to video games  Opportunities to live out fantasies solo or with others  Freedom from ostracism for having unusual tastes  But there is also a potential for harmful practices for force their way in  Custer's revenge, and "RapeLay" allow players to rape Native American women and perpetuate the idea  that victims enjoy being attacked  Where is the line- just a game?  Virtual sex  Is it cheating No risk of pregnancy or STDs  Could be used to strengthen bonds between actual couples  Virtual child porn  A victimless crime?  No actual child involved - virtual  Could provide an outlet for people with pedophilic feelings without harming a real child  Could this help lower rates of violence against children Or could it encourage perpetrators to seek out real children?  Case study virtual sex- ∙ A Tennessee man is charged with aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor upon discovering 3  pictures depicted as virtual pornography- the faces of two local girls aged 10 and 12. the third is  Miley Cyrus from Hannah Montana - the faces were photo shopped on nude women's bodies  ∙ Investigators states that the man had no contact with any of these girls Values  Honesty  Integrity - how to we treat children in society  Empathy/sympathy Respect for others Responsible citizenship  Loyalties  Society  Public's right to know Feelings of audience  Religious sensibilities of audience  Self  Principles  Mill/utilitarian - greatest good for the greatest number  Machiavelli- ends justify the means. Does allowing virtual child porn to exist really protect children?  Christianity- be fearful of God's punishment, consequences of heaven and hell  Golden rule- do unto others as you would have them do unto you  Hobbes- Desire vs aversion "all humans possess certain appetites or aversions" is virtual child porn a  way of satisfying those appetites?  Do no harm- ae they really harming anyone or is it preventing children from being harmed?  Discussion questions  ∙ What are you initial reactions to the video ∙ Do you feel completely computer generated images of children in porn are a safe alternative to  exploiting children? ∙ Do you feel that the photo shopped images of children and adults are a safe alternative?  ∙ How can we relate the case to the chapter?  ∙ Permits those persons whose sexual identities do not align with the preferences and identities  dominant in their culture ∙ Paternalism: the view that society has an interest in prohibiting acts that may lead to harm of  others  ∙ Utilitarianism: if producing VCP results in more pleasure for those who consume it, but no direct  bodily harm to real children, then we have no ethical justification for criminalizing such materials  Conclusion Even though the child is not real, its still harmful emotionally and psychologically  The production, distribution and consumption of virtual child pornography is detrimental to children as  it causes them to be seen as inferior to others  Although VCP is not physically harmful, maybe the public should still have a right to know that these  people exist due to safety reasons  Is it ever really safe? How can you know if a person who is walking among you and has those urges is  staring at your children- will virtual porn make it worse or help?

Page Expired
It looks like your free minutes have expired! Lucky for you we have all the content you need, just sign up here