Journalistic Ethics

It is good that the New York Times has a "Public Editor" to keep an eye on the paper's ethics. But sometimes, it seems like valuable column space is wasted chastising Times staffers for minor missteps.

Anyone in the media talking about raising income tax rates on the top two income brackets should disclose their possible conflict of interest. "Full disclosure, I fall into the top tax bracket myself, so I would personally be affected by changing this rate."

What I want to do here is to give anyone dealing with unethical journalists an invaluable tool that can be used, now, for mitigating damage.

Usually, journalists accept polls without pausing to think about whether they reflect reality or not. Last week, the media world was treated to an incredibly rare event: a journalist met a poll he didn't like.

The mainstream media, including the New York Times, played a pivotal role in ACORN's demise through shoddy, opportunistic journalism. But all have refused to acknowledge their role.

We've seen this pattern before. A non-sourced, anonymous story enters the right-wing blogosphere and gets picked up by mainstream media, allowing the right to stovepipe their insanity.

Brands are ditching advertising, which is really pretty transparent in its intentions, in favor of spin and PR, which really is not. This shift is partly because advertising is failing and partly because PR is right for the times.

In the age of Television Payola, regular "news" contributors never have to choose between television time and corporate shilling -- the shills get the best of both while the audience loses.

Could the Times possibly have assigned the photographer to take a picture of minors engaging in what seems like incredibly risky behavior?

In the months after we found out about the kidnapping, I witnessed the most amazing press blackout on a major event that I have ever seen. I wonder how strongly this non-reporting will be criticized in the weeks to come.