Journalism 305, Media Ethics â€“ Final Paper
The assignment: As weâ€™ve discussed various ethical dilemmas this semester, some of you have said, â€œThat oneâ€™s complicated. Iâ€™m glad I didnâ€™t have to make the decision.â€
This time, you do.
This assignment asks you to analyze a case and write a paper explaining the decision you would make and the reasoning underlying it. Iâ€™m not looking for a â€œrightâ€ or â€œwrongâ€ decision. Iâ€™m looking for a process of thoughtful ethical analysis that draws on what weâ€™ve read and discussed this semester.
You may choose one of two cases, which are listed this way on our WebCampus electronic reserves link:
Day, Case 4-1: ...view middle of the document...
The Potter Box is discussed on our textbook, pp. 100-102.
Whatever the framework you choose, address it in written form. If youâ€™ve chosen the Steele approach, answer his questions. If youâ€™ve chosen a Potter Box, list the facts, loyalties, values and principles that are at stake.
Your answers to the Steele questions or Potter Box lists, which will be turned in along with your paper, are simply a way for you to focus your thinking before writing a paper explaining your analysis and conclusion.
The paper must explain the decision you would make on the issues presented in the case you chose. It must also explain factors you considered in arriving at that decision, including class readings and discussions. As always, be specific in those explanations. It is not specific to write, â€œI thought about what Kant said,â€ or â€œI remembered what happened in â€˜Absence of Malice.â€™ â€ What aspect of Kantâ€™s thought, or of the movie, seemed relevant to the case?
Note that arguments made for or against a course...