B-log

New Discovery: These first papers were a series of “reactions” to the events of the OJ Simpson trial for the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson & Ronald Goldman, for the Ethics in Journalism class I was taking.

New Concern: Did I actually believe OJ was innocent? Certainly not…

***

Reaction Paper #2

      With all that seems to be going on surrounding the O.J. Simpson case, I would be remiss if I did not address it.  Since it continues to be a perfect example of many of the ethical issues that we discuss, I will continue to use it to my own advantage.

      We discussed libel in the classroom, and you mentioned that Simpson most likely would not bring forth libel charges if he is found to be innocent.  I definitely understand the logic behind why he would not want to do so, but I think it is a tragedy that the media is not being held accountable for the stories they present as the truth.  The class seemed to determine that it was not viable to fine the offending news source for publicizing faulty reports.  I don’t understand why that cannot be the case, especially in this situation.  If the press is going to the measures that they have, it can be little disputed that it is affecting the public opinion.  If the station that leaked the “existence” of the ski mask were forced to recant its story at the top of the newscast and publicly apologize for their error, then public perception may become more willing to wait until the trial to convict Simpson.

      Surfing over the channels on Friday night, I found myself repulsed to a new depth when I saw one of the tabloid shows dramatizing the Simpson’s saga.  They played heavily on the speculative issues and little on the known facts.  When I got over my shock at what I was watching, I thought about what I had witnessed. When the media produces these dramatizations, the viewer may gain feeling that they are watching reality.  If, in this reproduction, Simpson actually commits the murders, his goose is cooked when it comes to the trial.

      I suppose I am saying all of this to summarize that the media has become the victim of their own manipulation.  In a desperate effort to produce a story, they lost their integrity.  Their desperation may have cost the man his chance and a fair trial.

      Now, though, the defense is using the media to manipulate the public with hopes of fostering sympathy.   The poor ethical decisions of the reporters have resulted in the focus of the story becoming a bit fuzzy.  The prosecuting attorney is now facing backlash because of his release of the 911 tapes.  Because the stations aired the tapes, knowing they would make good ratings, the grand jury was dismissed, possibly turning a small tide in the defenses direction.  If the media is not to be held accountable to a certain degree, then the misdirected stories will continue to be distributed, much to the chagrin of justice and the joy of the American public.