310: Foundations and Ethics

Conflicts of Interest

Copyright, 2001, Janet McMullen

Updated Monday, April 28, 2003
Conflict of Interest = professional interest + responsibility vs. private gain.

Be sure you see the examples in your chapter.

What are some of the areas in which media practitioners have to be careful?

Your author writes: "A music critic who accepts free tickets to an opera may be perfectly capable of writing a detached and objective account of performance, but there will be lingering doubts in the mind s of the readers...."

What are some areas in which appearances can be a problem?

Day spends most of the chapter dealing with the biggest problems which he categorizes into three main areas:

Conflicting Relationships:

Recent articles on entertainment reporters illustrate the issue. In February, 2000, WHDH-TV, an NBC affiliate, announced it would no longer allow its entertainment reporter to travel at the expense of studio it covers. These junkets to cover movie releases or other events are paid for in part or in full by the production companies or distribution companies. WHDH is adamant that its reporter, Sara Edwards, was not influenced by the arrangement, the policy will end. Other stations are not willing to make the same choice. CBS-owned WBZ-TV will not discontinue its junket policy. A stations spokesperson said the station had had a no-junket policy and paid their own way, but that became cost-prohibitive. They are confident their objectivity is not being compromised. (Trigoboff, 2/21/2000)

Those junkets aren't just limited to movie studios. The networks offer them too. The reporters who go, not only get the trip paid for by the network, they get all kinds of goodies: the cookbook from one show, the baseball cap from another, pajamas from another, and a network backpack to carry it all in. There are books, CDs, T-shirts, bottles, mugs, - you name it! And if you could put a NAME on it, it was probably there promoting a show. The term for many of the articles written at such events are "pig at the trough" pieces. Gee, no ethical problems there.....

The press tours are put together so journalists can have access to the people they want to cover. But often it turns out to be an opportunity for producers and programmers to win the good favor of the journalists. The networks set the agenda for the meetings, arrange the space, schedule the interviews with stars and producers, and generally run the show. The food is a whole additional issue, and there's lots of it and it's top of the line. Further, journalists really can't easily get out of the tour to run down to McDonalds..... The Television Critics Association has made efforts to get the networks to back from the goody-fest, For more information, check out the article in AJR. ( http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=2593   )

In an environment when access to stars is crucial for interviews and magazine covers, the role of the publicist becomes very powerful and very important. Relationships developed with these people may be advantageous, but may also present an appearance of favoritism. The publicists may also demand serious concessions or conditions for the interview or photo and that poses ethical questions as well. Read "The Puppet Masters" in AJR, October 1999 .                                                     ( http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=783 )

An article in Brill's Content in October, 1999, explored the relationship between a reporter and a young woman he covered in Kosovo. In this case, he found that the relationship led to more falsehoods and than truth. Be sure to read the "Casualties of War" .  (This link is no longer active)

Personal relationships are also explored in the 1996 AJR article, "Schmoozing with the Stars"                                               ( http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=779 ). Here the focus is the relationship between reporters and the people they cover - and invite to glitzy press award banquets. The "get" for the guest at any organization's table at such a dinner becomes a major status symbol, one about which both sides are aware and use to their advantage.

Conflicting Public Participation:

These are areas in which your activities in public issues, organizations or events can compromise your role as a professional media practitioner.

Barbara Walters came under fire in 1997 for conducting an interview with Andrew Lloyd Webber on 20/20 but not telling viewers that she had invested in his most recent production, Sunset Boulevard. Walters said she simply "forgot" because she had not invested in a Broadway play before or since. She admitted she should have told viewers about the $100,000 investment. (Moore, 1997)

Personal salaries and speaking fees can create an impression of conflict of interest.  

Salary negotiations in the 1990s produced whopping figures for media personalities.   Bryant Gumbel $6 million + per year; Tom Brokaw, $7 million; Matt Lauer, $7 million; and Barbara Walters $10 million.  Many of those contracts will come up for renewal in a few months, and you can expect even bigger numbers (Robins, 1998)  In December of 2001, Katie Couric negotiated a five year deal for $65 Million; that's more than $13 million per year. (McClellan, 12/31/01)

Speaking fees can also be problem. When journalists reportedly earn thousands of dollars to make speeches at posh corporate or social events, can viewers or readers be sure they will report on those companies objectively? The question is legitimate.

Be sure to see the case studies in your text book.

Corporate Interests:

Sometimes these issues aren't limited to individual personal interests. On a broader scale, NBC seemed to be doing the same thing when it decided to run a story about the likelihood of a meteor crashing to earth on Dateline during the same week it was promoting its sweeps mini-series, Asteroid. Was that a manipulation of news for public relations and promotional reasons? (Carmody, 1997)

These economic pressures to sometimes cause compromise in the commitment to social responsibility. There are a number of ethical issues associated with the BOTTOM LINE in modern media.

We have to take a realistic look how media operate. If P.R. firms, newspapers or broadcast stations do not make money, they aren't going to be around very long. Nobody goes into business to go broke. Nor can you serve the public if you aren't in business any more. So the issue of economic conflicts of interest are harder to examine. It can be a tough balance on the fence to stay where you need to be, and it's not always easy to figure what is the best thing to do. Sometimes these decisions are made on a smaller scale - do you run an ad that might offend someone? Sometimes they are made on a larger scale: did CBS "cave" to economic pressures on the Jeffrey Wigand story?

In April, 1994, the student newspaper at the University of Miami accepted an ad from a Nazi hate group. They lost a number of advertisers and the school lost a large grant from a benefactor who was so offended that he withdrew his support from the university.

Whether we like it or not, media are seen as servants of public. The public may not really understand that media companies need to stay in business or the ethical challenges surrounding that issue. Now there are more and more BIG businesses with more concern about the bottom line and maybe less about the responsibilities involved.

Three characteristics of our industries illustrate this relationship:

Some excellent books illustrate the transition which has occurred. (See Dr. Mc's reading list for complete citations)

Each of these deal with the influence of profit and bottom line on a changing broadcasting industry in the 1970s and 1980s. While the books do take place in the seventies and eighties, they offer great insight into HOW we got where we are today. Students have particularly liked Boyer's book. The other two are very good, but longer.

These economic pressures became evident is some highly publicized cases in the past few years.  Be sure you can discuss each of them:

  

Some of the key changes that provide ethical challenges to those of us in the media professions:

The Development of Marketing:

Now we have media consultants who have serious influence of not only how the news is presented but over content as well...

One of the most influential is the MAGID CORPORATION, founded by Frank Magid. (Know about the role of these organizations, the pros and cons.)

The Christine Craft case became illustrative of the problems presented by consultant influence. She joined a station in the midwest, moving from California. She made it clear that she did not want to change her appearance or lifestyle when she accepted the job, and the station agreed. But when the ratings went down, the management brought in a consultant. The consultant conducted audience research which showed that Ms. Craft was considered unattractive by the audience, too old, and she came back at her co-anchor too often. Her station ordered her change her hair, make-up and let the consultant select, organize and calendar her wardrobe. She went a long for a while but protested. The conflict continued, she resisted and was fired. Ms. Craft sued her station, but ultimately lost on appeal. The courts determined that a broadcast station had too much at stake, that the anchor was part of the product of the station, and the station had a right to control its product. That's the nature of the business.

You can read Ms. Craft's account of these events in her book, Too Old, Too Ugly and Not Deferential to Men. There is a copy in Collier Library.

So do we have attractive news people or do we have qualified ones? What happens if the qualified person is not telegenic?

Eric Effron wrote a column in Brill's about the day he saw the editors of the magazine for which he worked asked by the CEO and Editor in Chief to rank the most interesting subjects and rate them according their potential to draw advertising. The ones that scored the highest were the stories that got "the green light." He wrote in the column, "Prior to that meeting I had though my job as a journalist was to find our what as happening and to tell people. Pretty basic - and pretty naive...." (Effron, 2000)( link no longer active)

Another issue concerns the blurring between editorial and commercial content.

What happens when NBC uses its news programs to promote entertainment programs? Recently, Tom Brokaw published a book which was heavily discussed on the TODAY SHOW, NBC NIGHTLY NEWS, and an NBC "news" Special. While the book about the generation which fought World War II was certainly interesting, significant and worthwhile, was it "news?" Or, since NBC had a financial interest in it, the use of the network news programs to promote financial gain in another company interest? ( Effron, 1999) 

In the April, 2001 issue of Brill's Content, an article questions WNBC's "excessive" coverage of the XFL?  Why would the local newscasts cover the XFL so extensively?  The article's author, Stefani Baldwin, (2001) contends that the reason is a conflict of interest.  In a two week period over 19 stories dealt with everything from skimpily clad cheerleaders to the red and black football. The station produces the XFL team's weekly pre-game show, it is owned by NBC which also is co-owner in the XFL.   A sports producer at the CBS affiliate said they're not about to cover it, "We consider it a ratings arm for NBC and won't take a role in promoting that entertainment."  So the conflict seems to operate in both camps. What about the news?  

There was a time not too long ago when you would NEVER see a program promotion made by a news reporter or anchor, even for another news program. It was seen as compromising credibility for a news person to try to sell anything or persuade you to do anything. The news person's job was to present the facts only, not to persuade. Now routinely, we prime time magazine shows promoted not only on the morning news shows, but even in the nightly newscasts. The NBC "Asteroid" situation is another example, but NBC is not the only network which does this. It happens frequently on all networks.

What about those "articles" which appear in the newspapers which look like regular content, but are actually paid advertisements. While they may be identified in small print, many readers, don't realize the copy is not written by an impartial objective reviewer.

Infomercials were something broadcasters avoided like the plague thirty years ago. It was considered unethical to broadcast a program length commercial, because it might be confused with a real program and not a paid advertisement. If I remember correctly, such broadcasts were even prohibited by the old NAB Code (but don't hold me to that, I no longer have a copy of it). In the 1980's stations which were purchased at leveraged prices found themselves hurting for cash when the economy turned. Looking for new revenue sources, some stations decided to try the infomercial and found them to be highly profitable. This was especially true in dayparts when all of the commercial inventory was not sold or could not be sold for the necessary amounts. With the infomercial, the advertiser bought an entire half-hour period (or longer). Stations started running infomercials overnight, in slow afternoon periods and then even bumped Sunday NFL games if the NFL was drawing enough viewers and the infomercial could generate more income for the station! The success of infomercials and the acceptance of home shopping networks on cable made the use of such programming more acceptable. Still, the question remains. Do people who watch these things realize the advertiser PAYS for the entire program? Do they know that it is NOT an independent program simply discussing the product.

When NBC and Lou Dobbs, formerly of CNN's Moneyline News Hour, partner to create a financial newsletter and then promote it on NBC news programs, including having Dobbs "do" financial pieces on those programs, does the public know that NBC makes money every time one of those newsletters is sold? (There is also some interesting stuff going on with a non-compete clause Dobbs had with CNN, but that's another story.) Dobb's appearance on news programs was actually described in the news release as part on the on-going promotion for the newsletter! (Effron, Dec. 1999)

Do the demands of the marketplace necessitate a sacrifice of quality? Some things to think about....

Sometimes the issues hit much closer to home:

How often to you have to "go live" now that you have a satellite truck? This was the topic of discussion at a 1998 BEA session in which some news directors admitted pressure to do the live "stand-ups" even when there was no real reason to be live or at that location. Nothing was happening!

If you have a $$$$$ new weather radar system, aren't you going to need to use every opportunity to USE it so that your audience will know you have it, see the benefits, watch the station and thereby increase ad revenues so you can PAY for the thing?..... 

An article in the 2001, April issue of Brill's examines how his research into how the issue of ratings influences story selection. In a survey with over 100 journalists, the author found that stories about minorities were often rejected because they didn't appeal to the target demographic or were perceived to hurt chances for good ratings. One producer for NBC put it this way, " It's a subtle thing.  A story involving blacks takes longer to get approved.  And if it is approved,  chances are that it will sit on the shelf a long time before it gets on the air. No one ever says anything.  The message gets through."  (p. 84)  Another producer told this story..."We needed a family that has (a mentally disabled) child for an hour on that disability.  I found a great, great upper-middle-class family in Miami, but they were black.  I was told that since (the condition) is found in both white and black children, we should go with the whites.  'Find another family.'" (p. 84)  Another reporter was told to make sure the people she was reporting on were white and that they didn't live in a trailer. "When people live in a trailer, people watching at home, I've been told, do not give a crap.  And if they're black, no one cares." (p. 85)  When the author asked a group of New York television journalists about the pervasiveness of racially qualifying stories, he was told that the topic had generated "buzz" in the industry.  Everybody knew about it, but nobody talked about it.  One man in the room, told him he had been out of the business for a while and that this was "our dirty little secret." (p. 131).  The article is very interesting. I urge you to get a copy of this month's Brill's  or read the one we have in the library. (Westin, 2001)

Ownership plays a part as well.  What happens when a local paper reports on an issue it cares about? Spin and propaganda, according to Brill's Content author, Eric Effron  in an April, 2001 article, "Propaganda Alert." In it, he examines the coverage of the Pittsburg Pirates, which were owned in part by the owner of the Pittsburg Tribune-Review and his influence in the coverage of stories. (Effron, 2001)

Then there are those BIG scale issues.  In an era when Big is Better and synergy is the key word, it is important to examine how these conflicts can cause problems.

Synergy:  A term which means that that two or more entities which are strong on their own are even stronger when joined.   It is the concept of synergy which is fuelling convergence in our media industries, but it is also causing problems -- key among them is a disregard of responsibility and an extreme focus on the bottom line. Synergy means literally "if we could make a lot of money on our own, we can make bucket loads more together." To that end, decisions are made.

It was that kind of attitude which led NBC to make what has turned into a fateful decision to join with Vince McMahon and the WWF for the creation of XFL.  XFL has been one of the most horrific failures in broadcasting history, but the decisions aren't getting any better.  Michale Keller, the XFL's vice president recently announced he would be drafting players right out of high school....But don't worry, he'd only take the ones who couldn't make the grades to get into college.!!! (That makes it okay...)  The XFL was founded on four principles, according to John Ellis of [Inside] magazine.  1) Pay players no more than $45,000 with minimum benifits. 2) Smashmouth football --no wimps allowed. 3) Cheerleaders would sell sex and could "date" players. Titillation was the goal. 4) Everything but the showers was on the tube --reality TV meets football.  This was great for NBC which was sort of behind in the reality programming game -- XFL provided the synergy of reality TV and football.  According to Ellis, "NBC allowed itself to be sucked in because it had other, ulterior, motives.  It joined forces with McMahon in hope that he would eventually bring the WWF (now on Viacom TNN and UPN) to the network. Now there was a cash cow.....The low end was where the business was, inexorably, headed.  Better to get there first and rationalize later." Ellis, 2001, p. 37.

Read "The REAL Dangers of Conglomerate Control" A Columbia Journalism Review Forum Looks at the Bad News about Corporate Synergy." CJR March/April, 1997. p. 46  http://www.cjr.org/year/97/2/danger.asp 

Read: "Guensburg, Carol. "When the Story is about the Owner: Can News Organizations Maintain Ethical reporting in the Age of Conglomerate Journalism?"  AJR 12/98 Required Reading:)  http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=237 ht 

Can ABC News adequately and objectively cover stories which might be detrimental to it's parent company Disney? Possibly not, if we examine why a story about pedophilia at Orlando theme parks was pulled from ABC's 20/20 program. Be sure to read "Mouse-ke-Fear" in Brill's Content in the December 1998/January 1999 issue. Consider this required reading. But you'll have to get it from the library.  (The link is no longer active.)

Rupert Murdoch, the driving force behind Newscorp and its holding is not know for his commitment to journalistic integrity. He has fired editors and reporters who covered stories in London which angered his political friends. More recently he refused to let his publishing house publish a book critical of the Chinese government. Why? Murdoch was negotiating media deals with the Chinese government, and did not want to antagonize them. Be sure to read "Murdoch's Mean Machine" in CJR (May/June 1998 at  http://www.cjr.org/year/98/3/murdoch.asp ). Note that there are five parts to the file, so be sure you get them all.

Columbia Journalism Review examined the implications of the CBS-VIACOM merger in an "Can Viacom's Reporters Cover Viacom's Interests?" Be sure to check the centerfold chart linked in the article. The issue is global as well as national. Viacom's CEO, Sumner Redstone, is quoted as taking the "Rupert Murdoch" position: "Journalistic integrity must prevail in the final analysis. But that doesn't mean that journalistic integrity should be exercised in a way that is unnecessarily offensive to the countries in which you do business." (Miller, 1999) Don't make the governments of totalitarian or communist countries mad at you if you want to keep doing business there! There are additional concerns with the merger about cutbacks in news divisions, more money to promotion rather than reporting, and inability to cover adequately stories which might put the company in a bad light. 

While we won't be really looking at the problems and scope of media mergers until Com 400, these mergers offer some serious questions about the role of media and the free-flow of information in our society. For a good discussion on this issue, read

The financial issues we've been addressing aren't just limited to the popular media. Professional media have similar concerns. American Journalism Review took a look at The New England Journal of Medicine and it's heavy-handed strategies to prevent new discoveries from being announced in the media before their journal was published. Read: (Wehrwein, 1998)

One of the most significant cases occurred in 1995 when 60 Minutes prepared to run a piece on the cigarette companies and their knowledge of the addictive properties of nicotine in cigarettes. An inside source had been discovered, but the man, Jeffrey Wigand, had signed a confidentiality agreement with Brown and Williamson, the company for whom he had worked. When it was learned that he might appear on CBS, the tobacco company notified CBS that it would be sued for "tortuous interference" - encouraging Wigand to break his confidentiality agreement. At the time, CBS was in negotiations with Westinghouse which was planning to purchase the network. A multi-billion liability against the company would not make it's purchase attractive to stockholders. The CBS legal department instructed the producers not to air the piece, and after much haggling, the 60 Minutes crew agreed. The issues associated with this incident are extremely important.

Required reading on the Jeffrey Wigand incident:

Financial conflict of interest can occur in other ways:

Lou Dobbs, anchor of a CNN financial program was mentioned in a 30 second radio spot for Verizon.  The copy included the line, "So even if you've never had lunch with Lou Dobbs...." Mr. Dobbs received no money for the use of his name, he was asked if it could be used, and was said to be happy with the spot.  What benefits did Lou Dobbs receive for the inclusion of his name in this commercial?  Should he have allowed his name to be used? How might the use of his name in the spot compromise his credibility in the future?  ("Dobbs Gets the Call for New Verizon Spot." Richard Huff.  4/11/02 at http://nydailynews.com/2002-04-11/New_York_Now/Television/a-147194.asp (link no longer active.)

These issues have significant effects in news coverage as well as other aspects of media management.  Consider these required reading -- I will draw exam questions from them:

"Poynter Guidelines for Balancing Business Pressures and Journalism Values"  by Al Tompkins and Bob Steel posted April 9, 2002.    Posted 4/9/02 at http://www.poynter.org/centerpiece/newsbiz_poynter.htm 

"RTNDA's Guidelines for Balancing Business Pressures and Journalism Values."  Bob Steele and Al Tompkins, posted 4/9/02 at http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=3809 

Alcoholic Beverage Advertising:

In early 2002, NBC decided to rescind its decision to air hard liquor ads on NBC.  While the network had places several restrictions on the distillers who would be advertising, there was still a lot of negative reaction to the decision.  NBC certainly saw advantages in having a new advertising group which very badly wanted to be on the air.  On the other hand, it created a huge PR problem for itself by incurring the ire of Mothers Against Drunk Driving and several members of Congress.  (Albiniak, 3/20/02, 4/4/02;)

Clergy Abuse story: Kelly McBride asks some interesting questions about why the story about Catholic Priests and pedophilia has been given so much attention now when it's been going on for decades.  See  "Anatomy of the Clergy Abuse Story: Why So Hot Now?" Poynter.org dated 3/29/02 or go to their "clergy abuse site" at http://poynter.org/column.asp?id=46 

Age in Television News:

See:  Vitello, Paul.  "Age Peril Hovers in TV Land." 4/11/02 Newsday.com.  at http://newsday.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=ny%2Dlivit11266482apri1..  This article discusses why the network news anchors are so old and how and why that may change. (link may no longer be available)

See also: Anderson, Kurt. "The Last Gerontocracy: Why the anchors are so ancient." Slate 4/9/02 at http://slate.msn.com/id/2064171  

NOTE:  Obviously there have been concerns about coverage of the Iraq war and issues of conflict of interest. I encourage you to give that topic some thought.  What are some examples? What were the issues? How ethical were the judgments made in your opinion? Why? 

I have given you a number of additional materials to read, but I believe that each of them will contribute substantially to your understanding of this very important topic. All of the links are listed in the text and bibliography, just in case there is an error. You should note, that I have found the CJR site doesn't work all the time on the weekends, so you might plan to download those or read them accordingly. I hope you are subscribing to CJR and AJR. Each of these publications offers important and timely information for any communications student.

Resources for this lecture in addition to Louis Day's Text : Note, Brill's Content sites are no longer available free of charge on the web. They are available in Collier Library stacks.  AJR site is not functioning this semester.  Those articles are also available in Collier, and using date information, you should be able to access them when the AJR site is back up and running.

Copyright, 2001

Dr. Janet McMullen

University of North Alabama