In My Opinion

In my opinion I believe Media Ethics is mandatory due to such celebrities as Kanye West who create events that have been unseen whether for publicity or just out of spontaneity. It Is important to have ethics that are universally known and to have individuals decide through their own morals whether or not somebody is right or wrong. We need the option to say what we thing without the thought that “big brother is watching”. I think it’s important to have people like Kanye West in the limelight because although there are negatives there are positives too and its up to the celebrity, media, and population to decided what is right and wrong. We must all work together for our own benefit.

George W Bush vs Kanye West

On September 2, 2005 the Red-Cross had a fund raiser in order to help raise funds for the victims of Hurricane Katrina. The fund raiser was aired live on the East Coast and had celebrities go on air to talk about and ask for help and support for the victims of the Hurricane that destroyed New Orleans. While everybody who was involved gave their condolences to the victims and asked the people of America to rally together in an attempt to give New Orleans assistance one person stood out…Kanye West. Once on air with Michael Myers a visibly distraught Kanye West delivered a minute long rant criticizing George Bush and his attempt to respond to the natural disaster stating that “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” This caused a major uproar from the media mostly bashing the celebrity for speaking his mind and undermining the Bush Administration. Mr. West appeared on the Ellen DeGeneres unapologetic saying “People have lost their lives and their families. It’s the least I could do to go up there and say something from my heart.” I believe the media was wrong for the portrayal of the incident and how they treat Kanye for it. I think this is one of those events where individual ethics come into play. Because if we look at the majority’s opinion it will be negative but the fact is Kanye was speaking for the minority so the majority can’t have a fair opinion on the matter. When dealing with the Code of Ethics we must “give voice to the voiceless: official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.” And also, “support the open exchange of views, even views they find repundant” and lastly “tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.” With all that said why did Kanye get portrayed as the bad guy for stating what a lot of people already thought? Would the reaction be different if he weren’t himself black or if he hadn’t already been portrayed as a cry baby by the media? What about George Bush himself and his comment? George Bush is quoted as saying that the Kanye West Katrina outburst was “One of the most disgusting moments in my presidency.” He later goes on to call Kanye West a “racist”. What do these quotes say about George Bush? Isn’t it odd for a President who had to deal with 9/11, national wiretapping, the cancellation of the Teach for America program for inner city children, and two wars to say that Kanye West was the cause for the most disgusting moments in his presidency? At that point why didn’t the media direct their attention to George Bush? I believe it’s because, at the time, it was more popular to hate Kanye West then to undermine the Bush Administration. This is one example of why we need individual ethics within journalism. There must be a point of view from both sides of an argument otherwise we face propaganda.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIUzLpO1kxI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1z8gCZ7zpsQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJxj7a9-DA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQhnKs09lHE&feature=related


Paparazzi scuffles aren’t the only outbursts the media have portrayed negatively of Kanye West. There are certain instances where Kanye West has been known to have a few backstage blow ups and on stage blow ups. In 2004 Kanye West lost the ‘best new artist’ award to country singer Gretchen Wilson and stormed out of the show verbally complaining. In 2006 Kanye West was attending the MTV Europe Music Awards and was awarded ‘best hip hop artist award’ unfortunately he lost ‘best video’ to a French group. Outraged, he stormed the stage to interrupt the group’s acceptance speech to claim “if I don’t win the award show losses credibility.” A year later in 2007 he was nominated for 5 VMA’s and was awarded none of them. When it was known that he was going away empty handed for the second year in a row he threw a fit backstage yelling “Give a black man a chance.” He then stated he would never come back to an MTV award show. Once the media gets a hold of these incidences they go to town on the negative publicity. Is this fair? I believe at the time Kanye west fans were split 50/50. Some believed he was wrong for acting so childish while other fans seemed to agree that he deserved the awards he was nominated for. If the public is split 50/50 on a certain subject what side should the media take on the matter? And should it matter if these incidents happen all the time or if it’s a just one time thing? I believe once it is known that this is how the person acts all the time it sheds bad light on the person and gives the public a reason to dislike them and although at the time I could understand why people disliked Kanye I was still a fan and believed he deserved recognition for his contributions to the music industry. Although the publicity was negative I believe Kanye liked it because as they say “all publicity is good publicity” or so I thought. Now comes the Taylor Swift incident in 2009. I will be the first to say that there was/is no excuse for the way Mr. West over reacted. I believe that this public incident was his biggest downfall and I would argue that he is still dealing with issues that rose from this incident. In this instance I totally agree with the media portraying him as a negative pop figure, even after the apologies. It’s hard to apologize for something you do all the time and make it seem sincere. But, although I agree, along with most people, with the way the media showed Kanye to the public after the Taylor Swift fiasco that doesn’t mean that they are right or fair. One guideline within the Code of Ethics is ‘Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews, videos or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.” When the media discussed his actions they never brought up that he lost his mother within the same year. Is this because it softens their argument of his over reactions or is it because he had over reacted so many times that it shouldn’t make a difference? I feel with these events it was fair for the media to use the “majority” code because so many people felt effected by what he did and it was a wakeup call to Kanye to let him know he isn’t as liked as he thinks. But, not all instances should be judged by what the majority thinks.

Code of Ethics

Kanye West’s career has been greatly affected by good and bad publicity. But what determines whether or not a story within the media is good or bad publicity, and who in the press decides which direction to take. There are two sides to every story, so who gets to determine which side the media will take? Is it based on the opinion of the majority or is it all based on individual ethics? With examples of Kanye West break downs and publicity stunts we can learn more about the media and there universal ethics. In my opinion I believe if you are in the mainstream media’s eye there are certain procedures you will have to endure, such as the paparazzi. Apparently Kanye West doesn’t agree. Kanye West has had a few public altercations with the paparazzi in which he has attacked the camera men and even been caught on film taking a camera and breaking it. At this point do we agree with Kanye for wanting his privacy, or do we look down on him for being a celebrity snob? Well, if we follow the media we will probably say that Kanye West is a snob. Is the media wrong for this? Do they have a right to shed negative light on a celebrity that treats them negatively? Should media ethics come into play with this kind of story, If so how? Should the media “do unto others as they would have others do unto them?” Or do they treat the story with a “veil of ignorance” not mentioning that he is a multimillion dollar celebrity and instead focusing their story on how he gets no privacy and is always in the spotlight? One of the Professional Journalists Code of Ethics states that we should “recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence, or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.” This would make it seem as though shedding bad publicity on Kanye West for his public outburst is fare. But, another guideline in Code of Ethics says to “Make certain headlines, photos, videos, etc do not misrepresent. They should not highlight incidents out of context.” So who’s to say why Mr. West flipped out on the paparazzi? For all we know it could have been due to a personal issues and not because he saw an attempt to get in the media’s spotlight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eomEQc5t4VI

Media Ethics

How do we decide what’s right and what’s wrong? Who decides for us what is right and wrong? Within the entertainment industry there are certain guidelines that must be followed in order to secure the information on controversial topics that is given to the audience, this is called media ethics. Ethics are the guidelines we use to determine moral judgment and standard conduct. Media ethics are moral rules put in place for professionals within the media. The guidelines that are prevalent today are Aristotle’s Golden Mean which states “moral virtue is an appropriate location between two extremes.” This means gives balanced point of views. Another guideline is The Golden Rule, “do unto others as would have them do unto you.” In media terms this means doing no harm to the subjects of your stories and treating them humanely. There is also the “veil of ignorance” this tells journalists to ignore the differences in class and race and to treat everybody equal. It is also popular to “act according to rules that you would like to see universally applied” and “seek the greatest happiness for the greatest number.” The reason these guidelines are put in place is because although we have professional organizations such as churches, trade groups, and private companies to help monitor and determine what is right and wrong there is still the individual media professional who must decide what is right and wrong within their own conduct code. Larose says that “when society cannot find a consensus on which to make laws governing the conduct of the media, we hope that individual ethics will prevail.” Because of this and principles recommended by the 1947 Hutchins Commission on social responsibility we created the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics. The reason for creating the Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics was to attempt to anticipate certain specific situations and to offer guidelines for journalists on how to deal with the specific situations. But what if Journalists come across a certain character or event that they’ve never seen before? What if somebody with mainstream success comes along and creates situations that have never happened before? How would the media handle it and how would they portray that character? If we would like to think of an example to use we don’t have to look any further than Mr. pop culture himself Kanye West.