Ethics.

To be a good journalist, you have to be know what ethics you need to follow and stick to them. The most difficult ethical challenge faced by journalists today is to get the facts right and tell the story fairly.

First, journalists must make sure that their facts are completely accurate. You can't just assume something or trust anything anyone says; you need evidence. You need multiple sources. You need to double-check your facts.

Second, you must present those facts fairly. This is where objectivity comes into play. We've talked about objectivity a lot before, but basically, journalists should best go about reporting issues by keeping their views to themselves and remaining impartial.

However, other concerns relating to the ethicality of journalism are also debated. For example, is the under-cover role acceptable? What counts as "crossing the line" in order to get a story?

This is a tricky question. Going under-cover could be the only way to get a story, but at the same time it could also cause harm if others feel violated when they find out. The under-cover role has been a source of both good (Nellie Bly) and bad in the past.

I don't have a solid view as to whether or not going under-cover is acceptable. However, if there is another way to get the same story, take it, even though it may be more difficult. If you go under-cover, you need to be very careful. If your actions are for the good of the general public, and you wouldn't feel guilty revealing your motives, then maybe it is all right. But don't just do it because it is the "easy way out" or because it will get you a really good story while harming many.

Another subject relating to ethicality is diversity in the newsroom. Should newsrooms be diverse?

Diversity in the newsroom gains numerous advantages, such as many different opinions, increased objectivity, and appeal to the masses. The more diverse people you have, the more people will be able to relate to what your publication has to say. If your newsroom contained people of all the same race, around the same age, with the same political views, then it is likely that you are going to come across as extremely biased.

However, problems could arise while trying to achieve such a diversity. For example, do you choose between the more diverse, or the better journalist? Quality or diversity? Personally, I would pick quality. If I can achieve both at the same time, that would be great. However, good journalism is more important to me than diverse journalism. If I hire quality journalists, they will know how to remain ethical and unbiased without having to be completely diverse.

The Society of Professional Journalists provides a list of ways that journalists can remain ethical. A few examples are:
-Be honest, fair, and courageous.
-Treat all with respect.
-Be accountable to your audience.
-Be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.