Radio-Television News Directors Association Code of Ethics

The news is constantly scrutinized by the public, and people obviously have their preference when it comes to which source(s) they choose to believe. The fact is that the news is business, and success is measured by the amount of people that choose a particular source. These two websites have two different attitudes and approaches to the news because they are trying to appeal to opposing audiences; however, some people do prefer to watch news that conflicts with their personal views. The sources are able to choose which stories they report and how they report. As long as they report factual data, the code of ethics is not violated. Consider the latest reports about the Saddam Hussein trial. Democracy Now! reports how his defense team walked out as the headline. On the other hand, Fox News reports how the trial was adjourned until next week in addition to the leaving of his lawyers. Democracy Now! is trying to emphasize the turmoil going on in Iraq, and Fox News stresses a little more positive aspects. Nothing suggests that one is false, just that they choose to report a different side of the story. This element may offend a group of people that disagree with the actions portrayed in the news, or it may coincide with the views another group of people. These news sources are trying to get people to read their material, and as long as people are doing so, they are getting the intended reaction from the public. In my opinion, these tactics do not violate the impartiality portion of the ethics code because a person is free to make their own choice of where he or she receives the news. He or she can then draw conclusions based on those sources. These news sources do not try to sway people into sharing the same ideals. The World Wide Web is a form of written communication just like any other publication, so the standards set by this code of ethics easily apply electron mediums, such as email, websites, and electronic advertising.