Eason Jordan's decision to withhold information protecting Iraqi sources

¶ … Eason Jordan made what he defined as a "life and death" decision to withhold information that might get his informants killed in Iraq. "It's very simple," he said. "Do you report things that get people killed? The answer is no.," (cited by Rutenberg, 2003). Jordan's decision is a little bit surprising, considering the media's generally ruthless approach to journalism: such as the push to get the story first, or to glean information before competitors in the industry. Journalism is cutthroat enough on an individual level: leading reporters on the ground and editorial boards to make decisions that are in the best interest of the company, but which are not necessarily ethical.

In the case with Eason Jordan, however, it seems that the editorial choice might have been the ethical one. Although "several journalism professors and commentators said Mr. Jordan had compromised CNN's journalistic mission so the cable network could continue to report from Iraq," Jordan's explanation seems equally as plausible (Rutenberg, 2003). Jordan claims that the decision was not made to enable CNN to continue reporting, which is probably would have done anyway. There is no reason to believe that Jordan's decision was made only so that CNN would be able to stay in the war-torn region. The decision to protect the Iraqi sources was based on the reality that Hussein's government was indeed using torture as a primary terrorist tactic to intimidate anyone it viewed as an enemy of the state. There is also no obligation on the part of an editor to print every bit of information it receives.

News media organizations do need to make administrative decisions like that made by Jordan, either to protect the self-interests of the organization or to protect their ethical objectives. If one of these issues weighs more than the other, then the editorial board may end up experiencing the level of criticism that CNN did during the Jordan incident. There are no hard rights or wrongs in this situation, because Jordan might have done the right thing for the wrong reasons. It is unlikely that Jordan could have used the information and it having not leaked to the Iraqi government; but it was more likely the journalists' lives were seriously in danger. Therefore. The editorial choice was an ethical one.

2) Is the Election System Flawed?

The current campaign and election system are flawed, but they might be the best possible systems given the unique features of the American political climate and cultural landscape. The mysterious Electoral College is designed to allow states with small populations to have a greater say in the political process than they might, if the president were to be elected directly. However, the Electoral College also signifies the fact that the United States is an indirect, and not a direct, democracy. The members of Congress, including both Senate and House, are elected directly. Yet the highest office in the nation is the President, and the people do not elect the president directly. The Electoral College does seem to indicate a flaw in the system, allowing smaller states to have a larger say than they really should. The whole purpose of the Senate is to allow the smaller states to participate fully in the federal government. Each state, no matter how big or small, gets a say in the Senate. The House of Representatives elective process is proportionate to the population of the state. With the balance in Congress, it makes no sense to have an Electoral College for President.

However, the greatest challenge or flaw in our current campaign and election system is not the Electoral College but campaign financing. The need for large amounts of money in order to run for office means that a very narrow pool of candidates has the chance to become president. It is impossible, though, to think of any other way the system could work.

4) Little Rock Nine

On the one hand, I would want to send my child to the Central High School on principle. I would fully anticipate the wrath and horror of the bigots and racists in the community. The temptation to taunt the racists would be overwhelming, because they resist positive change for a more perfect union. The fact that the federal government finally did away with racist laws allowing segregation shows that any of the protesters of integration deserve to be made as uncomfortable as possible with the presence of non-white students in their community. Of course, I would be worried that my child could get hurt in the mob madness. Lynching and other forms of domestic terrorism were realities, and I would remain fearful that my child might be exposed to that type of brutality. Another reservation I would have about sending my child to Central High is that the teachers and fellow students would probably make my child feel uncomfortable, out of place, and unwanted. Racism in schools as segregation might be outlawed, but racism itself -- in the minds and hearts of individuals -- remains. Knowing this, I would prefer that my child be taught by the best possible African-American teachers who would empower rather than intimidate my child.

5) Is it good for our nation to have live real-time coverage of war zones as in Operation Iraqi Freedom?

It is very important for our nation to have live real-time coverage of war zones throughout the world, as in Operation Iraqi freedom. Since Vietnam, brave American reporters have been covering some of the most difficult situations around the world. I admire these journalists, many of whom endure torture and some of whom end up killed. The reason why live real-time coverage is important is because the video footage reveals the truth on the ground. The American public needs to be reminded of how terrible war is, in order t stop supporting unnecessary military campaigns anywhere in the world. Although the imagery is gruesome, live coverage shows what most Americans would never otherwise see.

Information is a positive thing, and empowers the American public to make informed decisions. Of course, the news media controls which bits of footage to show and what not to show. The news that reaches viewers from live war zones is usually as close to the truth as possible, even during those times it is sensationalized. For as many Christiane Amanpours as there are in the world, there are unfortunately an equal number of Geraldo Riveras.