1) What Ethical Principles Should A Reporter Follow In Reporting/Writing A News Story To Ensure It Meets The Standards Of Professional Journalism?

Introduction

Nowadays, more and more people are place importance on journalismÐŽ¦s ethics. It is because everything that a journalist writes or says, or neglects to write or to say, in some or other way has an influence on many people, and that influences can be good or bad. The principles of good journalism are directed toward bringing the highest quality of news reporting to the public, this fulfilling the mission of timely distribution of information in service of the public interest. Therefore, ethical rhetoric is a important factor in the maintenance of a healthy communicative relationship between journalism and society or between journalist and reader.

So, what is ЎҐEthicsÐŽ¦? Doing the right things? Integrity of honesty? Legal behavior? Acceptable behavior? Appropriate behavior? The subject of ethics is the word comes from the Greek word ethikos, ethics is something pertaining to character. It has now become a science, it uses a systematic, reasoned, or rational approach, based on a set of principles to determine what is ЎҐgoodÐŽ¦ or ethical, and what is ЎҐbadÐŽ¦ or unethical. It also can be defined as the branch of philosophy that deals with questions of right and wrong, good and evil. And what is the objective of editorsÐŽ¦ rhetoric? The objective of editorsÐŽ¦ ethical rhetoric is to establish, maintain, or enhance their own credibility and that of their publications. Without a solid, credible, communicative relationship, journalists run afoul of regulators and social critics and lose the readersÐŽ¦ support.

In this paper I will argue that the bigger ethical problem laying inside the journalism industry are To Be Objectivity, Protect Public Interest and Protect The Source of Information

Be Objectivity

When journalists talk about objectivity, they mean that the news story is the reporterÐŽ¦s opinion or feeling, that is contains facts and that the account is an impartial and independent observer. Unfair and unbalanced journalism might be described as a failure in objectivity. When they checked against some kind of record, for example, a police report, the text of a speech, a payroll, unemployment data, etc, that the story to be objective.

Others hold it to mean that journalists should have something like a netural point of view, not taking a stand on any issues on which there is some disagreement. Instead, journalists are simply to report what "both sides" of an issue tell them. Some even extend this standard to the journalist's personal life, prohibiting them from getting involved in political activities, which necessarily requires taking a stand.

Others hold it should mean reporting things without bias, as if one just came to Earth from another planet and had no preconceived opinions about our behavior or ways. This form of journalism is rarely practised, although some argue it would lead to radical changes in reporting.

Journalists frequently make two errors regarding objectivity, Sometimes they claim to be completely objective and not bring any presuppositions to their reporting, noting that such claims are wrong because everyone has presuppositions and a worldview. Others wrongly bring their presuppositions to bear on a story so much that they fail to report the facts accurately.

Obviously journalists can't cover every angle or canvas every opinion; for example, including a statement from the Flat Earth Society in a story about the moon walk is of dubious utility. But a reporter's job is to help separate the wheat from the chaff; instead, they usually just present two different piles of chaff for the viewer to look at and choose from.

Finally, I think we can generally agree that the definition of objective is being without prejudice or bias, the presence of full understanding, honest, just and free from improper influence.

Protect Public Interest

The "public interest" used to refer to something very specific. In order to participate in a civil society, the public needed to be adequately informed about various issues which impacted their lives and were open to debate. Therefore, the public interest was literally those issues in which the public had a vested interest in becoming knowledgeable.

Now, however, when journalists refer to the "public interest" they clearly mean something different. Specifically, they mean something that the public will find interesting. This is a market value, not a democratic value. That is, journalism as tool of civil society demands that journalists pursue the truth of

issues that are important from a political perspective, the public interest includes: Detecting or exposing crime or a serious misdemeanour, Protecting public health and safety, Preventing the public from being misled by some statement or action of an individual or organization, Exposing misuse of public funds or other forms of corruption by public bodies, Revealing potential conflicts of interest by those in positions of power and influence, Exposing corporate greed and Exposing hypocritical behaviour by those holding high office, there are one example of public interest below:

The September 11 attacks and the war in Iraq were the proximate causes of this resurgent interest in neoconservatism. But it's also the case that neoconservatism, especially as it came to be embodied in The Public Interest, has left a unique and lasting imprint on American intellectual life, and on American conservatism in particular. It will be the task of historians to assign The Public Interest its place and to assess its contribution. What I can offer at present, in this our fortieth anniversary year, and our last issue, are a few provisional reflections.