Should the government regulate the media? What are the consequences of controlling the media or allowing freedom of speech determine communication? These communication dilemmas are dominant in the discussion of the freedom or regulation of the media. Other than the media regulation, various aspects of communication control government communication. These factors determine the balancing of politics and public relations via communication. Public communication is instrumental in the enhancing democracy, but even in a democratic state, the level of freedom must be regulated to enhance quality and limit the spread of chaos (Goncalves & Santos, 2017). Regulation of the media tends to diminish the level of information available, thus resulting in the call for freedom of speech at all cost whereas others propose the need to limit the truth in a matter that is destabilizing.
Communication is a wide topic, which make it difficult to determine the best ethical theory to enhance accountability, trust, and respect for human rights among other essential factors. Scholars concur that communication ethics is fundamental in all aspects of the person, corporation, social, national, and international relations (Hasebe, 2014). Hence, the investments by companies, public figures, and government officials to ensure that a single miscommunication does not result in war or promulgating discontent and retaliation from subjects or people influenced by the media. Social media and the internet embracement for the past two decades changed the traditional ethical codes managing the media for maintaining credibility and limiting subjective information or propagandas that propels war. Social media provide opportunities for individuals to reach many people, which can help air grievances against dictatorship or oppression of the minority. However, the lack of social media regulation increases cyberbullying, online defamation, and other contentious harmful messages.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Ethical theories have tried to determine the information provision and access to the public. The most used theories in communication ethics are utilitarian, deontology, and virtue ethics. Can utilitarianism mitigate the risks associated with freedom of speech or partial regulation?
Ethical Theories used in Communication
The most dominant ethical theories cited by scholars in communication studies are deontology, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics. The three theories differ in their arguments and their purported description of ethics. This section defines and describes the issues associated with each theory and its applicability in public and media communication.
Deontology or Kantian Theory
The deontology theory argues the good or bad of action is free from the consequences because the morality of the action is qualified by the action itself. Immanuel Kant stated, “Truthfulness in statements cannot be avoided is the formal duty of an individual to everyone” (Nicole & Boczkowski, 2012). This means that human beings have a moral obligation to perform their duties in a moral or ethical manner. Therefore, the decision of a person should be based on respect for moral law and the individual’s duties. Therefore, deontology argues that substituting the truth to prevent the likelihood of war or violence is unethical based on this theory. Kant argues that the truth is sacred thus making it immoral for the reporters to tamper with facts under any circumstance (Nicole & Boczkowski, 2012). The theory continues by stating that the value and respect for human rights should always dominate the information available and accessible to the public (Nicole & Boczkowski, 2012). Using this theory, a journalist or a government spokesperson has the role to communicate the truth at all times because the public has the right to know the state of the economy among other factors.
Kant’s absolutist stance depicts that moral duty is not an exception because deontology morals are the maxim of universal law. Employing the deontology theory in communication inhibits corruption, lies, and online defamation. Therefore, telling the truth at all time would seem to be the best ethical approach because it facilitates freedom of speech. However, there are conflicting issues such that can result in half-truths (Pricop, 2016). For instance, when dealing with a kidnapping, the FBI or police force dealing handling the criminals stalls the negotiations to ensure that the kidnappers think that they will receive the ransom whereas the agency is trying to determine their location and rescue the victims. These complications mean that the real world, unlike the theoretical aspects. Critics of the Kantian theory argue that in certain times, a person must violate an obligation to fulfill another obligation. The strict stance that the only way to justify an action is via their inherent rightness and duties diminish the cultural beliefs, social impacts, or consequences such as panic or hatred that can propagate conflict in the end.
Utilitarianism
David Hume was the first philosopher to propose utilitarian moral thinking. He argued that the best action is the one that focuses on human well-being. Jeremy Bentham would explore the utilitarian theory and its application in legal matters. However, John Stuart Mill interpretation of the utilitarianism became the main guideline for modern utilitarianism. Mills defined morality on the aggregate happiness for the greatest number of people. Happiness according to Mills is the pleasure, satisfaction of the desired outcome, welfare, and improvement in the living standards of an individual or the society (Bouman & Brown, 2010). Therefore, when faced with a dilemma, a person should make the decision by considering the consequences of choosing action A over action B and vice versa. Utilitarian theory values freedom of speech and independent media because the media place the role of watchdogs, thus enhancing democracy. Democracy enhances productivity, stability, economic development, access to information for intellectual reasons, and protection of human rights.
These factors result in higher aggregate happiness compared to dictatorship, which hinders the freedom of speech among other inhibitors. However, regulation and control of the extent of the freedom of speech are vital to prevent abuse of the individual rights (Bouman & Brown, 2010). The utilitarian theory claims that failure to control the freedom of speech results in the substitution of quality with quantity, thus reducing the value of the information hinders productivity, increases conflict, and other negative false information. Mill’s theory tends to account for all the issues and accounts for the conflicting interest that arise from deontology absolution on telling the truth at all cost. The theory is applicable in the real world, but the foundation, ‘the ends justifies the means’ contributes to unethical conduct in seeking and providing information.
A journalist who follows utilitarian guideline is likely to bribe or use any means possible to acquire the information if the info can cause the greatest happiness. Similarly, investigators in the criminal justice system are likely to employ torture on a suspect to get the needed information. The extent that results can justify the means diminishes the moral human rights such as humanity, freedom of speech, among other human rights violations. Critics argue that utilitarianism is a major cause of the proliferating corruption in the world and the discrimination for the minorities (Pricop, 2016). For instance, if the news that provides the greatest happiness is to air at the expense of news on rights of the minority, it would be ethical under utilitarianism but unethical in other perceptions. The major critics about misconceptions on utilitarianism led to the differentiation of utilitarian acts and utilitarian rules. The former depicts aggregate happiness as the determinant of an ethical decision whereas the latter argues that actions that result in the greatest aggregate demand but are illegal under the laws of the land are unethical (Pricop, 2016). The utilitarian rules reduce the criticism of illegitimacy by using the legal guidelines to dictate the actions undertaken in a different situation.
Virtue Ethics
Unlike deontology and utilitarian theories, this ethical approach states that an action is moral if it is justifiable virtually. Therefore, virtues are the determining agents of ethics. For instance, when faced with an ethical dilemma, the person is likely to ask himself, what an ethical person would do in a similar circumstance. The theory proposes that the individual considers the decisions that would make their families, role models, and society proud before choosing action A over action B. Such values and virtues are essential in shaping the actions of individuals and society. Proponents of this theory argue that virtues such as honesty, courage, justice, and generosity among other values are essential in public and media communication (Pricop, 2016). Democracy and freedom of speech are dependent on the courage of lobbyists, activists, courageous journalists and politicians to expose the evils perpetrated by the government, and the most powerful individual or corporations. For example, courageous journalists have provided the secrets and deceptions by the government and injustices such as police brutality. Therefore, virtue ethics provides the best guidelines to journalists and spokespersons because it determines the extent the courage or honesty goes without resulting in chaos or misinterpretation.
Literature Review
According to Pricop (2016), utilitarian principles expand the decision-making processes from an individual to a community or national levels. Therefore, the decision to withhold some truth such as editing a terrorist attack incident rather than streaming it live is unavoidable because it prevents panic in the society. However, some people may be able to withstand the horrific images but it is important to withhold the videos for the sake of the people who may develop heart attacks or PTSD if they viewed such images (Pricop, 2016). The embracement of technology and the internet makes pornography and violent videos accessible to children. Therefore, limiting information and access to such amoral displays would protect the children from exposure.
Hasebe (2014) concurs with the arguments by stating that freedom of speech is a utility because it protects democracy. However, the attainment of the greatest happiness depends on maximizing on the truth available to the entire society. The study depicted that in the growth and diversity of channels of communication, partial regulation promotes quality of the information available (Hasebe, 2014). For instance, newspaper editors revised the journalist’s articles and ensuring that the documents have no grammatical errors, the facts have supporting evidence, the information is unbiased and it does not instigate violence. However, social media platforms, blogs, online newspapers, and web pages or domains are opinion oriented; do not follow the same rules as traditional media does. Therefore, spelling mistakes, bias, and opinion oriented promote violence or negativity towards a person without having any factual truths. Partial regulation as proposed by utilitarianism would facilitate such changes and promote quality information.
According to Bovens, Goodin, Schillemans & Norris (2014), the media is the fourth estate because it questions the political agents; investigate the conduct of government officials, corporations, and other arms of the government to serve the public interests. The role of the media as a fourth estate is pivotal in identifying scandals, criminal behaviors, and corruption in the private and public sector. However, such activities are only possible if the press is independent of the control of politicians, the government, and organizations. The authors argued that public servants have a duty to communicate to the public and the media is mainly the link of the bidirectional communication and feedback between the public and the government and vice versa. However, the public servants are under legal obligation to state only what their employer wants to be known to the public (Bovens, Goodin, Schillemans & Norris, 2014). Lee (2010) stated that the politicization and public interests determine the level of information communicated to the public. The study states that the application of deontology would result in telling the truth, which is impossible because of the responsibility towards the political party and the public (Lee, 2010). Utilitarianism tends to facilitate more information to satisfy the public interests whereas virtue ethics provides a guideline on the extent of information provided and emphasizes on taking responsibility for any info provided.
Communication Ethical Codes
Media ethos is vital in enhancing morality in media institutions and making them responsible for the message they communicate. The codes range from informal regulation, institutional culture, control agencies, and professional ethics that provide the guidelines to journalism investigations. The professional codes call for consistency, honesty, objectivity, privacy, enhances decency, credibility, and truth. Journalism ethos emphasizes accountability and fairness, avoiding defamation, intrusion of individual privacy, and maintaining the anonymity of the witnesses, as the most important norms for a journalist. However, internet news sources rarely employ or refer to the written guidelines (Phillips, 2010). The legal provisions such as the EU Code of Conduct instigates the best moral or ethical environment that is fundamental in promoting transparency of Private Corporation, the government, and the press with the intention to serve the public interests (Phillips, 2010). Democratic nations have laws legalizing whistleblowing because it helps protect the employees who may suffer from the organization policies that hinder speaking out. The whistleblower should have facts and should avoid falsified information. Dovel (2017) states that guided by ethical codes and doctrines, journalists or the press provide quality and accurate information to the public. He notes that most professional codes rely on deontology due to the value of doing the right thing at all time such as nursing practitioners (Donev, 2017). However, the press influence to the community means that the press should refrain from persuading violence and should protect the news sources where the need arises. These circumstances require the partial regulation proposed by utilitarianism and virtue ethics.
Summary
Although freedom of speech and partial regulations are the main problems affecting media and public communication, cultural differences also influence the ethical perspective of journalists, news providers, and public spokespersons. According to Daniel and Gabriel (2013), culture is the link between the media and the public. Therefore, it influences the nature of the society and the media because it influences the professionalism of the media. For example, if a society values integrity, truth, freedom, justice, and care, the media will adopt a similar culture in its investigations, editing, and conveying the information (Daniel & Gabriel, 2013). However, in societies that accept and promote corruption, the media will require bribes and provide half-truths. State-owned media lead to different ethical problems because they depend on the government finances thus operate under the surveillance of the government. If the government is corrupt, does not respect human rights, or gender equality, the state-owned media will focus on non-essential issues such as petty crimes or praise for average government operations instead of revealing the evils in the government (Daniel & Gabriel, 2013). Therefore, culture is a double-edged sword; it can promote or hinder ethical communication.
Democratic nations endorse and respect freedom of speech. The truth has meaning because people have a right to know. Dictators, on the other hand, determine the truth and inhibit freedom of speech. People under the two-governance respond to news differently i.e., a person in a democracy believe that the news are true whereas in a dictatorial country, they do not believe the news are free from government manipulation (Daniel & Gabriel, 2013). Therefore, a journalist in a democratic nation values his or her integrity, the truth, freedom, and justice whereas a journalist in a dictatorship is likely to prefer bribes rather than risk death or imprisonment for revealing the evils by the government.
Communication is pivotal in social interaction. The freedom of speech provided by democratic governments demonstrates that people have a right to air their opinions, ideas, and grievances. However, individual rights are only allowed if they do not tamper with other people’s rights. Therefore, the laws regulate the extent of freedom of speech. Media and public communication evolution due to the embracement of the internet in the past two decades resulted in raising ethical concerns as depicted in the paper. However, employing ethical theories have depicted that partial regulation is essential in protecting the escalation of violence or spreading amoral messages such as defamation. The study recommends the use of utilitarian rule approach because it provides the best guidelines to weigh the benefits and risks associated with media and public communication. Utilitarian rule approach prevents the unethical investigations associated with the mantra, ‘the ends justifies the means’ that hinder ethical conduct. The legal application of utilitarianism will promote media and public communication ethics
References
Bouman, M., & Brown, W. (2010). ETHICAL APPROACHES TO LIFESTYLE CAMPAIGNS. Journal Of Mass Media Ethics , 25 (1), 34-52.
Bovens, M., Goodin, R., Schillemans, T., & Norris, P. (2014). WATCHDOG JOURNALISM. The Oxford Handbook Of Public Accountability .
Daniel, B., & Gabriel, U. (2013). ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF NIGERIAN CULTURAL VALUES ON PROFESSIONAL CODE OF MEDIA ETHICS. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science , 13 (5), 45-54.
Donev, D. (2017). DETERMINING MEDIA ETHICS IN TRADITIONAL MEDIA: TERMINOLOGICAL ISSUES. Synthesis Philosophica , 32 (1), 155-156.
Goncalves, G., & Santos, J. (2017). WHAT ETHICS FOR GOVERNMENTAL COMMUNICATION? ETHICAL ISSUES ON GOVERNMENT PUBLIC RELATIONS. REVISTA INTERNACIONAL DE RELACIONES PÚBLICAS , VII (14), 165-182.
Hasebe, Y. (2014). Utilitarianism And Freedom Of Speech, 3 , 238-246. Retrieved January 21, 2019, from http://www.sllr.j.u-tokyo.ac.jp/03/papers/v03part16.pdf
Lee, M. (2010). GOVERNMENT PUBLIC RELATIONS DURING HERBERT HOOVER'S PRESIDENCY. Public Relations Review , 36 (1), 56-58.
Nicole, J., & Boczkowski, P. (2012). From Principle To Practice: Expanding The Scope Of Scholarship On Media Ethics. Retrieved January 21, 2019, from http://www.communicationethics.net/journal/v9n4/v9n4_feat1.pdf
Phillips, A. (2010). TRANSPARENCY AND THE NEW ETHICS OF JOURNALISM. Journalism Practice , 4 (3), 373-382.
Pricop, L. (2016). DELIBERATIVE COMMUNICATION AND THE UTILITARIAN RESPONSE IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING A DECISION. Spectrum (Educational Research Service). 740-7874.
