University journalism programs – or J-Schools – weave in ethical decision-making lessons throughout classes, offering a rational process that becomes, ideally, second nature when journalists face complex ethical issues on deadline.
In one freshman-level course, a journalism professor arranged a mock press conference with a stage of professionals intent on building a petrochemical plant near a public beach.
Students filed in, grabbing cups of sugary grape juice and balancing store-bought sandwich creme cookies on napkins before flipping open notebooks and sizing up the sources.
Students knew to ask well-researched, pressing questions and – a journalist’s open secret – save the most difficult one for last, in case sources walked out.
After the “press conference,” when students were smug with confirmed, dark details, the professor reflected on what went well, what landed with a thud. Pacing and making sly glances in the direction of students, he asked how were the juice and cookies?
“Nothing special,” was the general answer. Then, bam! The professor swung around to face students. The press conference was a setup. The less-than mediocre refreshments were a gift from the petrochemical company. And journalists never accept gifts. Students who drank juice and nibbled dry cookies could have been influenced by this powerful faux company. Every student received an “F,” except for that guy who came in late and missed out.
Sure, the professor was over the top. Yet, he made that point stick – especially with the “F” grade – that every person has a tipping point when thoughts can soften and shift. When a person can be influenced and, sometimes unintentionally, denigrate their work.
Students fought back – they weren’t easily swayed and couldn’t be bought with lame snacks. By the way, no real grapes were in that fake juice.
Beware of your weaknesses, the professor said. Codes of conduct and appearances of improprieties hold for journalists as well as the people they cover. Identify your tipping point. To lose trust means to never get it back.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas studied ethics to graduate law school. But a moment came when he chose to quietly put lush creature comforts above expectations for his position.
It’s nice to have friends from all walks of life. But after dogged reporting from ProPublica, a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power, a few things come to mind. Thomas and his wife, Ginni, and real estate magnate and Republican megadonors Harlan and Kathy Crow became fast friends after Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court.
This timing is significant.
And the Crows pulled up in a superyacht and a private jet.
Spending fabulous vacations over two decades with Harlan Crow, who spent tens of millions promoting conservative causes and long-supported efforts to move the judiciary to the right, is suspect enough. But here’s the kicker – Crow’s think tanks filed amicus briefs with the Supreme Court! The scope of Thomas’ influence as a high court justice is seismic. His shift in thought could ripple through bodies of law.
The juice and cookies exercise in Journalism 101 was extreme, but journalists flat-out can’t accept gifts. Congressional lawmakers can’t take anything worth more than $50. Yet, from Crow, Thomas accepted a $19,000 Bible that had belonged to Frederick Douglass. But this is small potatoes compared with other contributions, including the $500,000 that Crow gave to a Tea Party group, founded by Ginni Thomas, which paid her $120,000 salary.
It’s outrageous. What was Thomas thinking?
Beyond the disclosure expected for justices’ travel – as in private jets, yachts and the like – much is left to justices to discern, based on guidelines for federal-level judges. Basically, high court justices police themselves. Thomas may exit this scandal unscathed and continue spectacular excursions, despite his saying in a documentary – bankrolled by Crow – that Thomas prefers the RV and Walmart Everyman’s lifestyle more.
Yeah, right.
We are left wondering how to add backbone to judicial ethics rules? What is Chief Justice John Roberts going to do about Thomas? How effective can Congress be in demanding reforms and an investigation?
Supreme Court justices sit in the highest position of public trust, but Thomas, in accepting presents far away from a Walmart parking lot, brought judiciary confidence to a new low.
This is not a partisan issue. It’s an American issue. And Americans deserve better.
