I have chosen to discuss Case Study 2-A (pgs.
37-38) and Case Study 3-F (pg.73). Both, in my opinion, are extremely relevant
issues that span the generations yet they both pose ethical questions that I am
sure everyone reading will want to weigh in on. I felt most passionate about
2-A just because the beginning ideals seemed so ludacris. I could not believe
that any “educated” person was capable of saying the things that Missouri
Senate Candidate Ted Akin did in “Can I Quote Me on That?” by Chad Painter
(Eastern New Mexico University).
Akin apparently made the claim that a woman could get
not get pregnant via “legitimate rape”; his reasoning was the female body knows
if a pregnancy is not desired so it has a way of blocking sperm. I laughed so
hard, I almost cried. This essentially negates the need for any form of birth
control if the woman participating in intercourse knows that she is not ready
to conceive a child. Really, that is what Akin is saying but Mitt Romney (R) put
him in his place by saying that this claim was not only “offensive” but “entirely
without merit.”
Soon, it became a question if Romney had really used the
words “offensive” and “entirely without merit.” I always was taught that if it
is in quotations, it must be true but as I learned, there is such a thing as
Quote Approval, which is used for politicos as high as the President. A battle
between journalists and politicos soon ensued as they both battled for “power”
and “control,” something I feel that they should have to share. Now, press
access is extremely limited when it comes to specific political events because
of quote alterations and he said/she said backlash.
The art of journalism has suffered due to those who
are unwilling to share the truth; to quote properly and to leave behind any
bias they may have. I do not think that we can base any political candidate
solely on what their staff releases in statements and such because we know
that, the President included, does have someone who writes the words he says.
Who knows how much of it is from his heart or just to appeal to the people?
That is for a different day and time.
Society complains that we are left in the dark when it
comes to the real issues so if a piece were to be submitted for quote approval,
there should be an asterisk attached to said writings. As writers, it is our
responsibility to bring as much truth as we can to the mainstream and it is
those who cannot adhere to set guidelines that should pay the price. The
problem is that even well-respected journalists have sunk so low as to create
quotes or misquote so unless citizens are following the politicians around day
and night with a microphone and camera, we will never see the whole truth and
that is just sad.
