[abe]

A Question of Journalistic Ethics

You are a reporter for a major national publication and you are given unrivaled press access to Steve Jobs or someone like him, (a well known newsmaking celebrity who was going to remain in the news the rest of his life) and he shares with you a breathtaking personal revelation but says that if you print it you will no longer have this same access to him. "You can print it when I'm dead," he allows.


Question: Do you tell your editor and allow him/her to make the decision of whether to print the revelation? Or do you simply keep that information to yourself?

I wouldn't ever want to be in the position of being disloyal to my employer, but I wouldn't want the editor to make a decision that would burn such an important source as Jobs.

And why would an editor make such a foolish move?

There are fewer and fewer sure things in terms of conventional thinking these days and you can't be sure that publications will always be driven solely by journalistic integrity as other agendas increasingly become paramount.

What would you do:

Honor your word to Jobs?

Show loyalty to your employer?

[Cold Warrior]

keep my word, keep it quiet.

[abe]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior 

keep my word, keep it quiet.

Keeping your word would mean not printing it. The subject of the interview only stipulated that you not print it. The matter of sharing it with your editor wasn't mentioned.

[peeb]

It would depend what was at stake. If this is purely personal, with only prurient interest, it is different to if it has material impact to others or some compelling public interest in divulging it.

[besson3c]

I wonder how many posts until this meanders into the war on terror?


(just teasing)

[Cold Warrior]

Originally Posted by abe 

Keeping your word would mean not printing it. The subject of the interview only stipulated that you not print it. The matter of sharing it with your editor wasn't mentioned.

what, do you want this to be some kind of riddle?

keeping quiet avoids the conflict with the editor. I just don't bring it up, and write the story without that scandalous piece of info.

Easy.

[SpaceMonkey]

The question is flawed. No one important, with a secret they want so protected, would say essentially "don't print it, but feel free to tell your editor." If they are so concerned about it, they definitely want you making the decision, not your boss.

As a journalist, your loyalty to your employer means that you do whatever you can to print a story. Which in this case would mean hiding the personal revelation. Problem solved. Next!