User:Kbird028

Media Ethics behind the Case Against Casey Anthony Trial
--Kbird028 (talk) 19:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

In the trial of Casey Anthony, many major followers updated their opinions every day through out the trial. The question behind this is, were their behaviors ethical in consistency with their opinions on the trial.

For a background on ethical issues and codes of media, I refer to the textbook by Straubhaar, J., & LaRose, R. (2010). Media now: Understanding media, culture, and technology (6th ed., "2010 Update"). With media and communication there are of course rules to follow, which come from our own constitution and rights but are guided by our own understanding and morals. "The first amendment gives media professionals a great deal of freedom, but media professionals and others are always guided in their choices by community standards, professional ethics, and personal values and morals" (Straubhaar, J. and Larose, R. 2010). In media stories may be portrayed inadequately with false allegations or misleading information so it is important for reporters to define their morality and to know the difference between right and wrong when reporting stories. This also means that reporters have their own ethical value, and must understand and comply with certain rules of conduct in the media.

In a report titled Shear on Social Media: Ethics, Social Media, and Live Television...You Can Run But You Can't Hide Bradley Shear mentions the Casey Anthony Trial. In the third paragraph of this article: http://www.shearsocialmedia.com/2011/07/ethics-social-media-and-live.html, Shear notes that lawyer, Tannebaum, has named this case “Social Media Trial of the Century”. Many reporters out there voice their strong opinions and others question if they are ethically just in the acquisitions they make.

In Green Heritage News, a magazine article is titled, "Media’s ethical failures in Casey Anthony trial." Within its opening statement on the media is blamed for "failure" in ethical rights. The article claims that the trial was full of media bias. Green Heritage News refers to reporter Nancy Grace. She fully covered the case by staying in Orlando right outside of where the trial took place and expressed her reviews each day of the trial. The article claims that Grace "is an articulate, intelligent and talented attorney, (she) gives a night-time update on the Casey Anthony trial on HNL and gives good information... but supports bias claims of the Casey Anthony's guilt throughout the trial."

Here is an example of Nancy Grace's reactions to the case in a YOUTUBE video, and also on the verdict of NOT GUILTY. Referring to Casey as "tot mom," and reporting "the devil is dancing tonight." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEWPkLJjEOk

Nancy claims that "the state lost... as well as Kaley."...

Another reporter, Terry Moran questions Nancy Grace's Ethics in reporting in the Case Against Casey. WATCH ON YOUTUBE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brEF9nYTel0

In this clip, Nancy says she felt sickness after the verdict was read...Moran questions her ethics by pointing out, "“Is it ethical for a lawyer like yourself to come on television and say ‘this defendant is guilty?’”

When questions of ethics arise such as these in one of the biggest court cases since OJ Simpson, who decides what is ethical or unethical to report, or say about the trial? Ethics is defined as "standards of conduct and moral rules for media professionals" (Straubhaar, J., & LaRose, R. (2010). In Nancy's decisions to report the case, she has no reason to be blamed for unethical behavior and she defends her status in the clip with Moran by retaliating with, "“The day that it is unethical to care about the murder of a 2-year-old little girl who ends up duct-taped and thrown into a swamp, is the day that I too, will retire, and rue the justice system.”"