Radical Media Ethics
Radical Media Ethics
复制标题
激进的媒体道德
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Stephen Ward
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Stephen Ward
数字媒体革命引发了新闻伦理的革命。既定的原则受到审查，新的做法出现，以前关于负责任的新闻工作的目标和原则的专业共识已经破灭。新闻伦理必须为全球数字媒体重新发明。曾经舒适的新闻道德世界-一个有些昏昏欲睡的领域-一套公认的道德准则，往往被认为是一成不变的-正在成为早期媒体时代的模糊记忆。我们见证了专业人士的整洁，前数字新闻伦理的结束，以及每个人的混乱数字新闻伦理的诞生。尽管数字媒体革命被广泛讨论，但这场革命对新闻伦理的深远影响却很少被讨论，也没有被清楚地理解。本文从数字革命的透镜来审视新闻伦理的现状。为了了解伦理革命的深度，本文比较了前数字媒体伦理和不断发展的数字媒体伦理。本文确定了前数字化的伦理方法的假设，并描述了“致命的一击”，数字媒体交付给这个传统的框架。本文主张一种激进的媒体伦理，并概述了新兴伦理的一些特征。它以数字新闻伦理的议程结束。其指导思想是，我们需要认真和系统地应对新闻伦理的现状，这种变化应该是激进的，而不是零碎的或保守的。
The digital media revolution has created a revolution in journalism ethics. Established principles are under scrutiny, new practices emerge, and a previous professional consensus on the aims and principles of responsible journalism has been shattered. Journalism ethics has to be re-invented for a global, digital media. The once cozy world of journalism ethics—a somewhat sleepy domain of agreed-upon codes of ethics too often presumed to be invariant—is becoming a faint memory from an earlier media era. We witness the end of a tidy, pre-digital journalism ethics for professionals and the birth of an untidy digital journalism ethics for everyone. Although the digital media revolution is much-discussed, the far-reaching consequences of this revolution for journalism ethics is less discussed, and not clearly understood. This article views the state of journalism ethics through the lens of this digital revolution. To get a sense of the depth of the ethical revolution, it compares pre-digital media ethics and the evolving digital media ethics. The article identifies the assumptions of the pre-digital approach to ethics, and describes the “fatal blow” that digital media delivered to this traditional framework. The article argues for a radical media ethics and outlines some features of the emerging ethics. It concludes with an agenda for digital journalism ethics. The guiding idea is that we need serious and systematic responses to the situation of journalism ethics today, and such changes should be radical—not piecemeal or conservative.