Online research in philosophy

This article reports findings of a survey of college students in 3 educational settings regarding student perceptions of mass media ethics pedagogy, including course objectives, value systems examined, the use of civil law and/or ethics codes as standards of media ethics, and teaching techniques used in media ethics instruction. Of particular interest was how closely student expectations correlate with previous research findings indicating instructor techniques and goals. The results revealed several areas in which instructor goals and the student rankings were not in accordance, including marked discrepancies between professor and student views on ethical standards employed, values systems examined, and teaching techniques preferred. The study concluded that most students would respond well to a stand-alone media ethics course employing a variety of teaching methods. Respondents felt the course should not emphasize universal ethics, but should respect pluralistic principles and examine various cultural interpretations of media ethics.

Critics denigrate the media for launching ethics discussions yet, there should be exploration of motives and recognition of efforts to overcome celebrated weaknesses and to develop climates in which values of information and humanism may be more comfortable with each other in media realms. Schulman has been press critic?columnist at the Louisville, Ky. Times and Courier?Journal.

Conferees at the University of Alabama technology and ethics conference in early 1990 discussed, among other things, the fear that information sources are being compelled by new technology - rather than human dignity - to develop new services and distribution outlets. Also discussed was the disparity between the media rich and poor in terms of access to such new information technologies as fax newspapers, and the problems these new technologies pose for media practitioners trying to uphold traditional values.

When everyone can be a publisher, what distinguishes the journalist? This article considers contemporary challenges to institutional roles in a digital media environment and then turns to three broad journalistic normative values - authenticity, accountability, and autonomy - that affect the credibility of journalists and the content they provide. A set of questions that can help citizens determine the trustworthiness of information available to them emerges from the discussion.

American media, in the face of the Grenada invasion ?lockout?; and the Westmoreland/Sharon libel actions, seem to be running scared. No longer are there accusations of ?imperial media,?; as newspapers, radio, and television news consumption decline. Media response is to look to ethics. Media should learn that corporate consciousness is less important in guiding the medium than is service to public or audience.

The paper offers the foundations of the theory of information media. Information media are dynamical systems with additional macrostructure of information-carrying states and information-preserving transformations. The paper also defines the notion of information media network as a system of information media connected by information transformations. It is demonstrated that many standard examples of information-containing and processing systems are captured by the general notion of information medium. The paper uses the theory (and informal discussion) of information media to motivate a structural approach to the information in media. The idea is that the notion of information transformation should be regarded as more primitive than the notion of informational state. Thus in information systems, especially in the context of information technology, information is secondary while information transformation is primary.

Scholars and media practitioners who gathered at "Media Ethics Summit II" explored a wide range of topics, many of them new since the 1987 summit. This article draws from those conversations and from the scholarly papers drafted by Christians and Cooper and distributed prior to the summit. It constitutes an informal agenda of issues and themes for anyone concerned with the current and future states of media ethics. The agenda falls roughly under nine touch points: issues raised by new technology and changing corporate environments; economic and other challenges to truth telling, objectivity, and other traditions; media and government issues; issues of accountability and transparency in all media of communication; educational issues; issues of diversity and globalization of all media; new agendas for ethics research and pedagogy; individual freedom and responsibility, and ongoing monitoring of the media ethics environment.

Between Summits I and II, media ethics established its legitimacy, summarized into recommendations for the field's future fluorescence. This history points to the challenges through which media ethics moves to another order of magnitude. A historical map of media ethics scholarship since 1980 divides into 5 domains, and each is introduced: theory, social philosophy, religious ethics, technology, and truth. From this content analysis of the literature, an agenda emerges for research and academic study that can raise media ethics to a higher level.