Ethics in Action: Going Undercover

      Undercover. Image Courtesy clipground.com

    Bringing the truth to the public is often a painstaking effort. While journalists must act with integrity, credibility, and ethics, there is no clear "one size fits all" code of operations. Undercover journalists have their time and place. Yet the fact remains that the methods for retrieving information must be as ethically sustainable as possible. The truth goes beyond delivering the facts. Readers need to know that the sources and the efforts that went into retrieving the story justifies the means. If they cannot trust the writer, how can they trust the story? Going undercover is a lie of sorts. It should be avoided unless there is no other way.

     As a hypothetical reporter, being asked to go undercover at a retirement home to expose negligent care is a tricky situation. My gut reaction is to exhaust all possible avenues before infiltrating the institution. Above all else, journalists are frontline workers. They should be trusted to act ethically and honestly whenever possible. 

     Transparency is a word we've heard a lot recently. Not just for government institutions and agencies, but for individuals. I believe the foundation of strong journalism rests on emotional intelligence and integrity. Someone who is strong of mind can problem solve without resorting to shady practices. My first instinct would be to dive into character witnesses. Visiting the nursing home, speaking with the residents there, the staff. Digging and researching for information and public records. There is a whole world of options out there before resorting to going undercover. The people in those homes may have family around. The staff may be motivated to admit the truth. Being able to get on their level and get them to open up is paramount. People make truth possible. Through their resilience, through their bravery, through their knowledge, through their actions. 

     Beyond the integrity of the story, there is the issue of personal involvement. To dive into undercover work puts a journalist at the heart of conflict. This isn't good for the story. It's easy for emotion to take over. We've all experienced this at some point or another. Being in the thick of the conflict may compromise integrity or damage credibility. 

     The bottom line is that people should be given the open, transparent opportunity to talk. No one should be coerced or tricked into divulging a story. It is almost always dishonest in my opinion for a journalist to seek information in this way. How can you write a truthful story if the sources are not willingly participating? The work of a journalist should be, above all else, for the people and by the people. Journalism is at its very core a democratic function. Bringing truth to the public should be done with utmost care to the human condition. A lot hangs in the balance of a story. I think the biggest questions to ask before diving into undercover work are the following-

1. Am I acting out of the best interests of the public and the people involved?

2. How can I gather this story in a way that will not only expose the truth but show credibility and honesty in my line of work?

Of utmost importance are the folks in the retirement home. You cannot tell their story without their knowledge and acceptance. You cannot tell their story without compassion. They must be a part of the deliverance for it to be morally sound. The public will have a deeper sense of confidence and trust in journalists who take pride in honest work. The public has no reason to trust a covert journalist. All methods should be exhausted before undercover work is utilized.