A question of ethics with the New York Times -- a j-student's perspective

I've been thrown for a loop.

It was only a few short weeks ago that I decided to change my browser homepage from CNN.com to NYTimes.com, a move that was unquestionably overdue for someone like me who is fed up with entertainment and sensationalist headlines from what I no longer consider a credible news source. It makes little difference really, considering that the news I get comes from all over the Web through my RSS reader. I like the Times for the same reasons everyone else does (multimedia reporting, feature stories, etc.) despite its left-leaning rap sheet, but some of their recent news judgment decisions have left me, a journalism student whose brain is still being molded, confused.

By now everyone's either read or heard about the fuzzy article that was published last week about presidential hopeful John McCain's "troublesome" relationship with female lobbyist Vicki Iseman. The article, which made these claims using sources that would only dish the dirt on the condition on anonymity, prompted McCain to hold a press conference to handle questions and deny the allegations. So what? People use confidential sources all the time right? But I'm lost...

All UF j-students are required to take Problems and Ethics in Journalism. I did. I got an A, too, and after reading this article I pulled out some of my notes. For most journalism dilemmas we were given a checklist to determine if the decisions that are made can be ethically justified. Usually they are if at least a few of the conditions in the checklist are satisfied.
Here is the checklist we were given for using confidential sources:

• All else being equal, identify all news sources fully.
• The story should be of overriding public importance.
• Always try to obtain the same information from sources who are willing to be quoted first.
• Grand confidentiality only to someone who is relatively powerless or likely to lose the capacity to remain a solid information source.
• Don't let anonymous sources use the cloak of anonymity to attack other individuals or organizations.
• Make sure you are willing to tell readers how you got your information and why you're protecting the source's confidentiality.

And here is the attribution being called into question:

Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.

First, it's tough to think that a paper as big as the Times sucked all their sources dry before having to publish this story based on anonymous sources. If there were "several people involved," couldn't they at least be more specific and say what positions they hold in the campaign? With this attribution, they might as well have gotten the information from McCain sign-waver Joe Schmoe on the corner at the voting precinct. Second, could a story about a questionable romantic relationship of a potential presidential candidate years ago be considered an "attack on an individual?" Of overriding public importance? To me, it's not so overriding that it needed to be rushed to publication before more attempts at obtaining open information could be made. In this case, I'd also say that the Times did not openly explain to their readers the "how" and "why" behind the information. I think they failed the checklist.

This only leads me to my next troubling thought: Has most of the American public been conditioned NOT to question their news sources? The answer to this must be a resounding "yes" if channels like FOX News can sustain so many viewers, and this is disheartening.

Whether or not the article is true, and whether or not the voters would actually care if it is or not, was it a responsible decision for a news icon like the Times to publish an ultimately unsubstantiated story like this one? Based on my novice knowledge, I'd have to say no.

A blessing in disguise: What I learned from a redesign

What began last week as a nightmare has ended in some lessons well learned. A while back I accepted the task of building a Flash site for a local company that specializes in customized school footwear fund raisers for high schools across the country. What the client wanted was very simple and fairly easy to build, but I will shamefully admit that my heart and soul was not fully into the design, and it wasn't my best. I even opted to leave it out of my portfolio.

When the time came recently for the client to want some changes and updates made, my computer decided to really ruin my day. No files to be found. And yes, I know, what the hell was I thinking without a backup? Of course, I thought I had made one but yet again, no files (I've had quite a few problems like this with my PC laptop - I think I see apples in my future). Long story short, a rebuild was unavoidable. I took those lemons that life tossed at me and squeezed them into a cleaner, more precise and MUCH more professional looking glass of lemona...I mean Web site.

BeforeAfter

ItsaShoeThing.com -- What do you think??

The rounded star in the left corner has been an adopted logo of sorts for the company, so I was excited to find this new header font that carried the theme. I spent most of today working through some PHP tutorials for building an automated e-mail form for the "contact" section, but I'm still ironing some kinks. On the upside, the client is happy and I've got a nice addition to my portfolio.

Morals of the story:
* It never hurts to make a backup of a backup of a backup.
* Upload backup files to your clients hosting server. (I realize this might be a "duh" for some people, but hey, I'm learning!)
* Before turning your laptop into a Frisbee and tossing it out the window during times of technological turmoil, step back, take a deep breath and make the best of the situation.

Short and Sweet Media Job Fair

I have to give a lot of credit to our department of journalism. Not a day goes by that I don't receive some nugget of information in my e-mail inbox. If it's from Charles Harris (all UF j-students know this mysterious man, the phantom e-mailer/Director of the Knight Division), I know that I'll read about the happenings of our college. To my detriment, I've become the kind of e-mail-skimming zombie who mindlessly deletes things just so my mailbox doesn't become overwhelmingly overflowed, and admittedly, some of those journalism e-mails just do not get read (we get a LOT!). But I digress. Miraculously, instincts told me not to be so hasty the other day and check out a few, and I found this little gem of information.

Now I've only been to one job/internship fair. It was last year in our student union, and I don't think I've ever been more intimidated in my life. The Grand Ballroom looked more like one of those big spread-out office rooms you see in movies with the endless desks and cubicles. Minus the cubicles. Then throw a stone-faced editor behind each desk, all facing the entrance as you walk in and you can imagine the size of the knot that took root in my gut. I was lucky enough to snag an awesome summer internship that day with the High Springs Herald, but not after releasing a few beads of sweat.

Which brings me to why I am so amped up about South Florida's out-of-the-box idea for a job fair. Who in their right mind wouldn't rather dress up and go to a jazz club to mingle with some industry bigwigs on a more relaxed level than the stiffness and anxiety-ridden experience of a traditional job fair? It's being hosted by the South Florida chapter of SPJ (Society of Professional Journalists for all you non-JOUs who stumble on this), The New Times of Broward and Palm Beach and by South Florida Media Jobs. Plus it's on a Saturday, about a 10-minute drive from my folks' house. You'll definitely see me at this one, but I plan on leaving that annoying stomach knot at the door.