The ninth edition of Media Ethics: Issues and Cases has been updated to reflect the most pressing ethical issues in media. Featuring 25 new cases on hot topic issues from fake news to drones and a new chapter on social justice, this authoritative case book gives students the tools to make ethical decisions in an increasingly complex environment.

In this essay I argue that the Stranger’s interest in keeping the philosopher and the sophist distinct is connected, primarily, to his assessment of the charges ofsophistry advanced against Socrates, which compels him to defend Socrates from these unduly advanced accusations. On this basis, I establish that the Stranger’s task in the Sophist, namely to keep philosophy distinct from sophistry, is intimately tied to the project of securing justice and is therefore not merely of theoretical importance but is also—and essentially—of (...) political and ethical significance. (shrink)

The purpose of this study is to see how Jon Stewart and his Daily Show colleagues hold traditional broadcast media accountable. This paper suggests Stewart is holding those who claim they are practicing journalism accountable to the public they claim to serve and outlines the normative implications of that accountability. There is a journalistic norm that media practitioners, and the media as a whole, should be accountable to the public. Here, accountability “refers to the process by which media are called (...) to account for meeting their obligations” (McQuail, 1997, p. 515). However, the government cannot enforce this accountability due to privileges afforded to the press by the First Amendment. Further, while national press councils have been effective in other countries, specifically India, there is no national press council in the United States. Enforcing accountability, then, falls to journalists—along with press critics. The researchers suggest that The Daily Show with Jon Stewart holds traditional broadcast media accountable in four distinct ways. (shrink)

In this paper I provide a compelling argument against the thesis that Aristotle’s understanding of the relation between the soul and the body can be construed asfunctionalist, despite some passages that would seem to support such an interpretation. Toward this end, in section I of the essay I offer an interpretation of Aristotle’s account of the soul-body relation that emphasizes the non-contingent nature of the connection between the soul and a specific kind of body, arguing that Aristotle’s account of the (...) soul as the “form” and “actuality” of the living thing, and of the organic body as its “matter” and “potentiality,” shows their necessary relation with one another. In section II, I present the functionalist account of mind, placing especial emphasis on its post-Cartesian genesis, which takes seriously the “problematic” status of the relation between mind and body. I then attempt to show, in section III, how because functionalism holds that psychic capacities can be realized within a number of different material bases, including physical and artificial systems, it is incompatible with Aristotle’s conception of the necessary soul-body relation, and thus that Aristotle’s account of psuche is not best construed as functionalist. (shrink)

Burt Hopkins's The Philosophy of Husserl presents a challenging and thoughtful elucidation of Husserl's phenomenology that pays special attention to important methodological aspects of Husserl's philosophy, and, thereby, to Husserl's characterization of phenomenology as a pure and transcendental philosophy. Unlike other texts that attempt to elucidate Husserl's philosophy, Hopkins carries out his project in an unusual fashion, by beginning with a consideration of the conflict between Plato and Aristotle regarding the meaning and status of the eide, and ending with a (...) systematic critique of two of Husserl's most fierce opponents, Heidegger and Derrida. This review essay gives an overview of Hopkins's book and offers some critical remarks. (shrink)

Unpublishing, or the act of deleting previously published media content from a news outlet’s online archive in response to an external request, is a growing ethical and practical dilemma for journa...

In the last three decades, the consideration of whether non-human animals should be ascribed any moral status, and if so in what way it ought to be ascribed to them, has become of central philosophical, political and economic importance. Thus, given thecontemporary significance of what may be called (jar simplicity’s sake) the “animal issue,” it is worthwhile to examine in what way Ancient Greek philosophy might contribute to our understanding of the issue and to our philosophical response to it. With (...) this in mind,in this essay I examine the issue of the moral status of animals from a “critical” Aristotelian perspective, on the basis of which I shall attempt: (§I) to show how, unlike the Cartesian view of animal nature, Aristotle’s conception of the non-moral status of animals stillinforms the prevailing contemporary view of the animal, and (§II) to establish that Aristotle’s failure to ascribe moral status to animals should be rejected (a) given his admission that animals are, by nature, capable of suffering while they are unable to engage in rational deliberation, and (b) given his understanding of the connection between moral blameworthiness, natural disposition, and various kinds of acts, particularly un-chosen and chosen willing acts. In this way, we shall show that although the prevailing contemporary view of the animal’s moral status represents a slightly more “elevated” view than Aristotle’s, insofar as (typically) we do not explicitly claim, as Aristotle did, that animals are due no moral consideration, by critically appropriating the relevant Aristotelian texts, we nonetheless findrich philosophical evidence that permits us to further elevate our conception of the moral status of animals such that we are prepared to grant them genuine moral significance, not just in theory but also in practice. (shrink)

Documentarians certainly have different ethical standards than their journalist counterparts, yet filmmakers also adhere to ethical constructs such as truth telling and privacy. The decision by Morgan Neville to recreate Bourdain’s voice in Roadrunner, and ethical issues including truth telling and privacy that the decision created, are not outweighed by the news value or impact of that inclusion.

In this article, I argue that the just society is vegetarian. However, I do so in a way not commonly attempted by contemporary animal rights theorists, insofar as I appeal to Plato to make my case. Although there are certainly other ways to argue for this position, appealing to Plato is a significant and interesting way to lend historical credibility to this argument, and as such, the argument offered in this article provides an important contribution to existing analyses that attempt (...) to establish that humans ought to be vegetarians. (shrink)

This study investigates the portrayal of five female journalists on the Aaron Sorkin television series Sports Night. The women were depicted as acting unprofessionally, displaying motherly qualities, choosing their personal lives over work, being deferential to men for ethical decisions, and showing a lack of sports knowledge compared to the male characters. The researchers use social responsibility theory to suggest why these portrayals were ethically problematic.

In this article we present (1) a close paraphrase--virtually a translation--of Heidegger's Sein und Zeit, §74, "Die Grundverfassung der Geschichtlichkeit," pp. 382-387, together with an analytical outline found in the Appendix; and (2) a brief commentary on the text. What Heidegger says about his own translation of Aristotle's Physics B 1 applies here as well: "The ‘translation' is already the interpretation proper. Thereafter only an explanation of the ‘translation' is called for.".

L’esperienza dell’istante is a book with two faces. On one hand it is an introduction to and commentary on Carlo Sini’s work; on the other hand it investigates the relationship between time and writing, time and utopian thinking, time and ethics. The opening section of the book begins with an analysis of Socrates’ attitude toward writing as it is shown in the Phaedrus. Carrera offers that by refusing to write, while at the same time claiming the role of judge as (...) far as the viability of writing is concerned, Socrates lays out the blueprint for any metaphysical judgment to come: Metaphysics is entitled to question the role of writing insofar as it takes no part in it, claiming that its authority comes from the unwritten voice instead—the voice of the soul. In the same manner, metaphysics judges the world and imposes its values on it by pretending to be removed from the world’s contingency. (shrink)