Where Has All The Good Stuff Gone? - Lecture 8

I found the ethics lecture quite an interesting one where the power of difference was really amplified. Something can be perceived as perfectly acceptable by one person can be interpreted in dramatically the opposite – to the point where offence is taken. It is no wonder that ethics revolve around personal morals.

To me, ethics is the need to colour things in. It either has to be white or black; right or wrong. So for me it makes sense why I get very confused and awkward about the topic. I wouldn’t say I’m a fence-sitter, I just believe that every situation is rather unique and can see both points of an argument. In most cases my sense of justice is most heavily relied upon.

For instance, the debate over whether abortion should be legal or not. I think it should be, but I really wish it didn’t have to be.

I also tend to take the villain’s side in almost everything when it comes to novels, television series’ and movies.

So I believe there are grey spots, lines that can be blurred, whatever you want to call it. They are there. Otherwise ‘ends justify the means?’ wouldn’t be such a hot topic for debate.

Coming back to the lecture, there was a very interesting activity that was undertaken. While the examples and the activity itself was rather fascinating and cool to think about, I found the fact that the personal information was so feverishly emphasised very telling about ethics themselves. There are, like with most things, obviously majority and minority groups.  We gave the year of study we were in, our gender and what nationality we were. So clearly these three aspects alone hold a powerful influence over us, particularly when it comes to our morals and sense of right and wrong, which only makes sense when you think about it.

I am one who loves humour; a snarky sarcastic attitude is a favourite for me. So I would take a lot of campaigns a lot less seriously. Rather than think about all the implications, I would laugh at an advertisement I see on the road, take a picture and put it on Facebook or make a meme. Most of the time I am aware if something is wrong, but a lot of the time it is so bad that I just have to make fun of it. I can understand other people getting angry and complaining about such a thing.

I think, however, this part of my personality explains a lot of my reactions to the examples we were given in the lecture. I found confronting images good and ethical – people need to feel to be able to get the message. But the images that took a sexual tone without any subtlety I thought were in bad taste, just because it is so overly done and unnecessary. Plus the message can be lost. Like in this example:

The last thing I would have noticed there are the shoes. I mean seriously.

Now there are three ethical theories:

1. Deontology – do the right thing by following the rules

-          all ethic codes of practice fall under this category

2. Consequentialism or teleology – it doesn’t matter what you do as long as you get the right income, or as I like to think of it as the ‘ends justify the means’ argument

3. Virtue – intrinsic values that drive the way we live and do not compromise our identity

So what is best for a journalist? The third option is ideal, but sometimes the world can be a harsh place and we are put in situations that really test us. Personally I don’t think a single option there is wrong. I do believe that sometimes doing what is socially deemed wrong does not mean it is actually wrong when done for the right reasons. I also don’t think that it is an excuse to do whatever.

At the end of the day you have to be happy with yourself. If following the rules is the best way to do that, then great. If you achieve what you set out to do even though things got out of hand, okay, learn from it. If you were yourself and did everything that you could without crossing a line, then that is wonderful.

All I believe is that you do have to know yourself for this job, you have to be at some level of acceptance and peace. You have to have a strong sense of justice, even if that firm grasp of what is right and wrong might be a bit blurry. That’s why I am excited to be a journalist. I think I have the right mindset and personality for it and I really just want to put society into shape any way I can.

I’m not going to draw a thick black line between what can and can’t be, because experiences have shown me that will only cause trouble and confusion later on. Keep an open mind and do what you feel is right. Those are my ethic guidelines.

Here are some more questionable examples:

This particular advertisment has caused quite a bit of controversy lately. It stars Dakota Fanning, who is a well-known child actor admired by many, you guessed it, children. She was the image of innocence and purity, until she posed for this perfume.

Not only is the pose suggestive and the flower symbolic of virginity and other such things, but you have the 'Oh Lola!' comment underneath that is in reference to a very controversial and banned novel, Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (a novel I have actually read) which regards pedophilia and all ranges of socially immoral concepts.

The big debate that has come from this is whether advertising is sexualising children and how young is too young for such things?




Then there is this story: the debate over Kevin Carter's photo. This lead to the Pullitzer Award in 1994 and the photographer's suicide in a short amount of time.




The ethical debate here is the backstory. Kevin Carter didn't help this little girl who was on the verge of starvation. He in fact waited for the vulture to get closer before taking his photograph and shooing the bird away. This seems to be enough for most people to judge upon, but there is much, much more than that. There were strict instructions given by officials for Carter's expedition, a small amount of time, and children in similair states everywhere with adults not too far away.

Here is a quick video discussing the ethical question of Kevin Carter's photograph:

In the end its a personal decision whether Kevin Carter did the right or wrong thing. But I think at least he took the picture and made us think.


I found this website that has a whole bunch of these that are all quite interesting to know about:

http://www.thecheers.org/Entertainment/article_3205_13-Weird-Ad-Campaigns.html