Need this done by 5:30 P.M. need four questions done three paragraphs each question 7-8 sentences per paaragraph Number of cases = 4 Each set of questions = 10 points -Read the questions carefully -You must answer all the questions listed at the end of each case. You will be graded for: specificity, clarity, ability to analyze the subject area, use of examples, knowledge of the subject matter, writing quality, and style. You will also be graded on your use of class materials and discussions. – This is an open book exam. You are allowed to use: class readings, dictionaries, and all handouts from the class. -You should submit the answers as a word document. -Length of each case-study should not exceed more than typed one-page single-spaced. Ideal length is two to three paragraphs comprised of 7-8 sentences in each paragraph. ______________________________________________________________________________ Case #1 The campus at Houston State University had become decidedly less civil in the past five years. The university’s students were increasingly more conservative than their predecessors and were less appreciative of the administration’s commitment to a system of compensatory justice designed to increase the minority presence among the faculty and the student body. They were particularly incensed at the campus orthodoxy of what they referred to as “political correctness” (PC). For more than two decades the administration of the college had prided itself on its commitment to racial equality as reflected in its policies to hire faculty of color and increased diversity among its students. The university’s aggressive recruitment of minority students had resulted in a student population which was now 28% non-Caucasian including 19% African American. Houston State had recently initiated a “minority access program” in which students who did not meet the minimum GPA standards would be considered for admission. The university also established a minority scholarship program, funded by private and corporate donors but administered by the Houston State’s Office of Financial Aid. Until recently the college had provided for a reasonably tranquil and decorous academic environment but conflict erupted when a group of African American students demanded a separate student union for themselves. On one occasion, racial epithets had been painted on the dormitory room doors of several students. In another incident, African American students had hurled rocks at a White fraternity in protest as members paraded in front of their fraternity in “black face.” The dean of students, alarmed by the visible manifestations of racial prejudice and the climate of intolerance, proposed that the university adopt a student speech code to promote civility on the Houston State Campus. As approved by the faculty senate, the university could discipline student for addressing an epithet to another individual member of the campus community that was intended “to demean the race, sex, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or age of the person addressed” and was intended “to create a hostile educational environment for that individual.” This action was condemned by the Student Government Association as a “misguided attempt at political correctness and an unprecedented violation of free expression on the Houston State Campus.” As the voice of student expression, the school newspaper Beacon, had faithfully covered the growing campus controversy. Until now, the Beacon had assumed an even-handed editorial posture on the race relations issue with its denunciation of both the highly publicized incidents of racial harassment and the university’s speech code as unconstitutional overreaction to a few isolated episodes. !2 Alvin Green, a journalism major, and a weekly columnist was in his senior year at Houston State. Known for his polarizing views and wry wit, Green was an uncompromising supporter of free speech rights, and his views often clashed with those of the university’s leadership. His latest column scheduled for publication, however, concerned the newspaper editor, Melissa Pugh. The column was a direct assault on various diversity programs initiated by the college and what Green described as “the administration’s alliance with the totalitarian orthodoxy known as political correctness.” Green was particularly critical of his institution’s two-tiered admission standards and cited statistics to prove that the mean grade point average and SAT scores of African American students admitted to Houston State were below those of entering White freshman. “Compensatory justice,” Green wrote (in the column he submitted for publication), “in the form of double admission standards increases resentment among those who were admitted on merit, thus perpetuating a de factor system of racial apartheid on the Houston State campus. And the administration’s failure to confront the moral impoverishment of this system constitutes nothing more than an appeasement to the forces of political correctness.” Questions: This poses a dilemma for the editor, Pugh. As a forum for student expression, Beacon, needs to take a position on this matter. As she says to Margaret Highwater, the faculty advisor to the paper, “If we come out against the administration’s policies, we’ll be seen as undermining the university’s efforts to provide educational opportunities for minorities in an academic setting free of racial harassment. Also, our minority readers will accuse us of racism. On the other hand, if the Beacon supports these policies then we’ll lose credibility with a majority of our readers who view this as a threat to individual liberties. Not everyone will applaud our decision to run Alvin’s column, if that is what we decide to do, but it’s important that we maintain credibility with our readers — minorities included.” Highwater responds by saying, “Remember, although this is a column and not an editorial stance of the paper, it will still be perceived as such. You are responsible for everything you publish. What it boils down to is what you believe is in the best interest of the campus community, and in the long-term interest of all readers.” Assume the position of student editor, Melissa Pugh, and then decide whether you will publish Alvin Green’s column. Discuss both the teleological and deontological positions of this debate. Case #2 It was supposed to be a routine transport of an alleged kidnapper. WBRZ-TV had been following the story and was at the Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport to get videotape of sheriff’s deputies escorting Jeffrey Doucet to stand trial. FBI agents had arrested Doucet in California for the alleged kidnapping of 11-year-old Jodie Plauche. Doucet, a karate instructor, allegedly kidnapped the girl in Baton Rouge and took her to California. A month later, Jodie was found unharmed when FBI agents arrested Doucet in an Anaheim hotel room. WBRZ-TV videographer Abram McGull was videotaping the handing over of Doucet from the FBI escort to the local sheriff’s office at the airport. As he videotaped, Doucet was handcuffed and led past the terminal checking area by Officer Bill Conner. As Doucet walked, a man wearing blue jeans, a striped T-shirt, dark glasses, and baseball hat, turned from the wall phone, next to an ATM, where he was standing, aimed, and fired at Doucet’s head. The man who pulled the trigger was Jodie’s father, Gary Plauche. The WBRZ-TV team had witnessed and videotaped the event. The tape distinctly showed Plauche firing the gun and Doucet’s head jerking as the bullet entered his skull. From there, the cameraman quickly focused on Doucet as he dropped to the floor. The camera zoomed into Doucet’s face and open eyes as blood gushed from his head. News director, Jay Young, decided to lead the ten o’clock newscast with this story. !2 !3 Questions: Should the videographer have kept taking the video after the shooting occurred? Should any of the video have aired on the news? Would a disclaimer for the graphic video ethically allow its use? What role could the station’s website play in the dissemination of such footage? Case #3 Less than a month after pleading no contest to a misdemeanor charge of possessing drug paraphernalia, the 20-year-old son of Oklahoma Governor David Walters took an overdose of prescription drugs. He died 11 days later, two days after Christmas in 2019. In the opinion of many, including Gov. Walters, a steady and intrusive barrage of news coverage drove the youth to suicide. Gov. Walters used half of his 32 minute 2020 State of the State message to the Oklahoma legislature to denounce “reckless media.” The first attack on the media was for what he called a “mauling, feeding frenzy, slow water torture” of media coverage into an investigation of the governor’s campaign promises. The second phase turned on the media for their “dogged” coverage of his son after the youth had been arrested for possessing a bong pipe and a seed mistakenly thought to be marijuana in his apartment (it was never determined who the bong pipe belonged to; Shaun Walters maintained that it was one of his other three roommates). State officials and members of the public in the gallery applauded several times of the Governor’s criticism of the press. The Governor claimed the media devoted too much attention to Shaun Walters’ misdemeanor arrest. Gov. Walters also claimed that his son had been “hounded” by the media at the University of Oklahoma, where he was a student, at his Norman, OK, apartment, and even while attending classes. Soon after the governor’s State of the State speech, two former Oklahoma governors disagreed with Gov. Walters’ complaints about unfair media coverage, saying they had found the local press corps fair during their terms. Reporters argued that press coverage was not the major cause of the young man’s death and that Shaun Walters had been suffering from depression and anxiety for years. Questions: Is the story of significant importance to the readers/viewers (as a News Editor/ Director/Reporter)? How would you know what is at risk? Does misdemeanor charge warrant coverage in the arrest of the governor’s son if it does not warrant coverage in other cases? Discuss both the teleological and deontological positions of this debate. Case #4 Campus police at the University of Florida was called to a trash dumpster to investigate “a large amount of blood” and a “foul smell.” The police investigators found bloody towels, plastic gloves, and a large plastic bag containing more towels and the body of a six-seven pound female infant. After removing the body from the bag, the police briefly placed the body on a towel on the ground next to the dumpster. The photographer for the student newspaper, The Independent Florida Alligator, who had arrived at the scene minutes earlier, took the following photograph. The mother was later found to be an 18 year old university student and the doctors at the university hospital later determined that the baby, in its seventh month, had died of miscarriage rather than abortion. The photograph ran with a story next day in the newspaper’s front page. The paper received 1000 or more phone calls and emails over the next few weeks, with most readers criticizing the paper for its decision to publish the photo. One student wrote, “This is the most unnecessary coverage and tactless piece of journalism I’ve ever encountered. Do you care about the family’s privacy at all?” Another student wrote that the photo was in “poor taste and insensitive.” !3 !4 Questions: As the editor of the newspaper, would you choose to run this photograph? Is this a legitimate story, and if so, does it belong on page. 1? Does running the photo inside lessen any criticism of poor taste? ! !4 Purchase answer to see full attachment Tags: ethical dilemma journalism team teleological outcome GPA publication deontological outcome User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.