Ethics in Today’s Media Industry
On November 5, 1992, ABC Television Networks aired an episode of “PrimeTime Live” featuring a segment on Food Lion’s food handling practices. After the story aired, Food Lion stock plummeted and customers began shopping at different grocery stores. It was clear that “PrimeTime Live” had damaged Food Lion’s business.
Food Lion filed a lawsuit against Capital Cities/ABC, Incorporated, alleging trespassing, mail and wire fraud. After deliberation by a Greensboro, North Carolina jury, the Food Lion grocery chain was awarded $5.545 million in punitive damages.
The verdict put the freeze on investigative journalism, at least where hidden cameras and recording devices were concerned.
With the results of the Food Lion v. Capital Cities/ABC, Incorporated lawsuit, a very important question arises: should the media use hidden cameras and recording devices to report stories? Before this question can be answered, a few concepts must be taken into consideration. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using hidden cameras and recording devices in journalism? Does the public view this type of investigating as wrong? Are the repercussions worth getting the information to the public?
There are always advantages of using hidden recording devices. Journalists get to show viewers what goes on behind-the-scenes, where the public does not have access. In the “PrimeTime Live” episode following the verdict in the Food Lion v. Capital Cities/ABC, Incorporated lawsuit, Diane Sawyer declared: “Our cameras showed a televangelist pretending to heal people but, in fact, tricking his followers…The following year, we pretended to be a health clinic to reveal that doctors were missing cancers… Should we have used hidden cameras to track crooked car repairmen?…Is it spying? Is it lying? Is it right or wrong? What if you heard some fast food restaurants were unsanitary? What if the mentally ill were being neglected, or children were being abused?”
As with all aspects of reporting, there are disadvantages. The main disadvantage is facing a lawsuit. ABC Television did not loose the lawsuit to Food Lion because the information they recorded was necessarily false. They lost because of the unethical ways they obtained the information. ABC Television was convicted of mail and wire fraud, as well as trespassing.
Does the public view the use of hidden recording devices as wrong in investigative journalism? According to a survey conducted in February 1997 by the Media Studies Center, most Americans side with ABC Television in the Food Lion case. Also, most Americans feel that ABC was not using any techniques for investigating that other television network were using. The following charts show the exact results of the survey conducted by the Media Studies Center:
There are always repercussions for actions we take. Sometimes it’s in the form of negative feedback, and other times it comes in the form of a stiff penalty. Capital Cities/ABC, Incorporated was slapped with a $5.545 million ruling for punitive damages by a Greensboro, North Carolina jury. After the trial, ABC devoted an entire ninety minute “PrimeTime Live” episode focusing on the use of hidden recording devices.
Diane Sawyer opened “PrimeTime Live” by portraying hidden cameras as American as motherhood and apple pie. She posed questions that made the viewers ponder ethics in obtaining information for journalism.
Sawyer spent nine minutes showing parts of the 1992 Food Lion piece, including segments disputed by Food Lion. After the footage was shown, Sawyer talked to a few of the jurors that were part of the Food Lion v. Capital Cities/ABC, Incorporated case. Sawyer asked, “Recently, another news organization did show some of the jurors our original broadcast. We wondered if it changed anyone’s mind.”
Juror Greg Mack replied, “If I could have considered the broadcast, it probably would have changed my mind a bit in favor of ABC.” But juror Betty Wicker wondered, “How do we know those tapes weren’t put together? With a piece of this and a piece of that.”
ABC allowed Food Lion two minutes for rebuttal at the end of the show. Food Lion insisted, “The PrimeTime Live” show about Food Lion was not true, and it wasn’t good journalism. We know this because Food Lion has the 45 hours of hidden camera footage ABC shot in our stores. This footage shows that “Prime Time Live” staged scenes, violated our store policies and then deceptively edited the tapes.”
The debate over ethics in this case helps upcoming journalists decide what limits they will push in broadcasting. While there are questions about the way Food Lion reacted to the “PrimeTime Live” broadcast, most of the discussion focuses on the ethics and issues of honesty, accuracy and fairness.
Ethics involve making difficult choices when faced with competing values and conflicting principles. Ethical decision-making often involves choosing a course of action among several options that each carry negative consequences.
Journalists face these dilemmas when reporting on issues of national security, government corruption or public safety. ABC Television encountered these ethical dilemmas when they decided to use deception and hidden cameras to report their story. “PrimeTime Live” journalists went undercover to produce reports on abhorrent treatment of patients in Veterans Affairs hospitals and in board and care homes, spotlighting government regulatory failures that jeopardized the welfare of patients.
Hidden recording devices are sometimes misused by television, and journalists often use forms of deception and misrepresentation as a shortcut in their reporting. These tools are very delicate, and when improperly used they harm innocent people and erode journalistic integrity. When these tools are overused they become dull, losing their impact.
Hidden recording devices should be reserved for those exceptional stories that are essential for the public to know. Furthermore, deception and hidden recording devices should only be used as a reporting tool of last resort. There are other approaches to obtaining the same information within the limits of ethnicticity. Another question that must be pondered: If Food Lion was causing a serious health violation by handling meat improperly, why did ABC Television wait several months after they went undercover before the “PrimeTime Live” report was aired?
It was very important for ABC Television to appeal the verdict in the Food Lion case. ABC Television must hold its news reporting in the highest standards. Journalists need considerable freedom to work for the benefit of the people. They also have a responsibility to honor that freedom, by being ethical and excellent in what they report to the public.
Finally, there is a important question that every journalist must ask themselves: Is it right for a journalist to violate the principle of honesty in order to provide the public with meaningful, accurate and comprehensive information about significant issues? This question is debated every time a journalist works on an article of great importance for the public. It is a question of ethics, and ultimately has to be decided on by the journalist and their employer. The only insight that the journalist should remember is stay within the guidelines of the Constitution, the thread in the fabric of American life.
Credits
Baker, Brent. Media Research Center Cyber Alert. 17Feburary97. Internet. http://www.cyberalerts.com
Owens, Sheila. “Poll Finds Public Sympathetic to ABC in Food Lion Case”. 17Feburary97. Internet. http://www.mediastudies.org..
Steele, Bob. “ABC and Food Lion: The Ethics Questions”. 04April97. Internet. http://www.poynter.org.
Teeter, Dwight L., Jr. Law of Mass Communications. Foundation Press, New York, New York. 1998. Pg. 365.
Wall, Barbara Wartelle. “Food Lion Uses Copyright Law To Claim Ownership Of ABC Show Tapes”. 03September95. Internet. http://www.newswatch.com.