Journalistic Fraud

The journalism industry generally follows a code of ethics as do most professional industries. Though the code of ethics can vary within the industry itself, they most often share some common principles. Among these concepts are "truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability - as these apply to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent reportage to the public" (Wikipedia, 2007). When journalists go against this code of ethics it is often classified as scandalous or fraudulent. Two examples of journalism fraud are the stories of Stephen Glass of the New Republic and Jayson Blair of the New York Times. There are some common elements in their stories yet differences on how their behavior was regarded by critics of the industry and the industry it self. Applicable psycho-social theories explaining their behavior include, but are not limited to, the Anomie-Strain Theory, Differential Association Theory, Control Theory, and the Rational Choice Theory.

Similar elements of the articles are primarily based on the nature of behavior as well as the increasing levels of deceit attached to it. Both Blair and Glass exhibit characteristics commonly associated with compulsive lying. Their lies began with a single embellishment and grew in very calculated ways. Blair was known to use many well thought out measures for creating a story. He crafted these stories by taking information from other published works, cell phone interviews, and it is believed that he accessed digital photos from The Times picture department (New York Times, 2003). Likewise, Glass, so consciously deceitful, went as far as building supporting evidence; falsified notes, web-sites, and self established voice mails for fake references (CBS News, 2003). Glass and Blair both appear to have consciously created fraudulent stories and enjoyed the attention received from presenting such captivating information. Blair was described by colleagues and fellow students as someone who was always working constantly and attentive; by superiors as eager (New York Times, 2003). Glass is quoted describing the excitement around sharing his ideas at story conferences. He explains that he "wanted every story to be a home run" (CBS News, 2003). Considering the reward of positive attention and professional advancement, both articles shed an addictive nature to the behaviors of both Glass and Blair. Glass informed CBS that he would think, after every article published, that he "must stop." Though both journalist exhibit similar characteristics, there are some differences both in behavior and how the behavior was perceived inside and outside of the industry.

An easy distinction is that Blair tended to create stories around actual events and assignments. He would lie about his whereabouts and falsely filed expense reports and receipts. He would conduct phone interviews to obtain information as well as study photos. Blair phoned photographers to report that he was near by but would never arrive. Regardless to the fabrications surrounding the events and individuals depicted in his stories, the events and individuals were real. They were misquoted and often times falsely quoted inserting things that were never actually said. Many individuals confirm that they did not have face to face interviews with Blair and some claim to have never spoken to him at all. (New York Times, 2003) Alternatively Glass turned his embellishments into complete fabricated accounts. The people, places, and events in which Glass reported on were all products of his own vivid imagination. Most of Glass's time was spent creating evidence to support his fictional story. (CBS News, 2003). The perceptions into why one would behave this way vary between the two accounts.

Blair was considered by some fellow students as hard working and by others as "immature, with a hungry ambition and an unsettling interest in newsroom gossip" (New York Times, 2003). It is thought that he may have considered other interns as competition. Much of the blame as to why such acts of deceit happened is placed on the editors for their lack of communication. It is also suspected that he got away with it for so long because the subjects of his interviews seldom submitted complaints and he used brilliant measures in covering his tracks. "Most of all, no one saw his carelessness as a sign that he was capable of systematic fraud" (New York Times, 2003). Inside the agency Blair was considered by many as being charismatic, possibly to exemplify how they could have been fooled by him. Finally it is implied on a couple occasions that the rapid promotion of Blair was due to the industries desire to promote an African American journalist through the ranks. (New York Times, 2003). To commit to the idea that this situation was allowed to progress due to diversity inadvertently asserts that race is also an explanation for why the behavior existed at all. It is this very assertion that attributes pressure on individuals to pursue illegal means in achieving the "American Dream."

Glass (CBS News, 2003) on the other hand, declares that the lies were directly connected to self esteem. He is explained as sweet in a sinister way and "aching to please" by an editor. Glass further receives what appears to be credit for his imagination. Glass created a system where riveting stories inspired very little complaint due to the fact that the situations and people involved were fictional. The fact checkers are not blamed in this case, due to the fact that Glass had worked as one and knew how to get around raising red flags there. "Charles Lane, the executive editor of The New Republic from 1997 to 1999, says the magazine was ultimately accountable" (CBS News, 2003). He then asserts, in defense of The Times, that they were up against someone with intent to deceive and that was unusual. The article Ends with a quote by Lane expressing how little he trusts Glass, "If it was sunny outside and Steve and I were both standing outside in the sun and Steve came to me and said, 'It's a sunny day,' I would immediately go check with two other people to make sure it was a sunny day" " (CBS News, 2003). Although most would agree that the publishing agency is ultimately responsible for what is published in representation to their company, it is necessary to hold individuals accountable for their actions. This is seemingly a contrasting objective in these two cases. Glass is rightfully left distrusted by colleagues in the profession while Blair is almost let off the hook in that his race and pressure to succeed brought him to his lies. Both are perusing financial gains for their behavior by writing books.

Earlier mentioned compulsive lying could offer an explanation for such behavior. Though difficult to find a clear definition for compulsive lying, it seems that it is often attached to psychiatric components. It is also appears to be attributed to low self esteem in the individual. Both individuals displayed a need to succeed and the compulsion to continue producing by way of lying. Assuming this is the reason for their behavior could mistakenly also assume that compulsive liars are drawn to journalism as a profession. Perhaps it appears this way because it is an industry held more accountable for such behaviors. Most likely it is the nature of the industry which breeds success by any means possible due to competitiveness of an inundation of individuals trying to be noticed.

The Anomie-Strain Theory, as described by Robert K. Merton, is an imbalance between two important cultural components. The one is culturally defined goals. They are determined by society as the goals that individuals within the social structure should strive to meet. The seconded component being culturally defined means in achieving the goals. Society also determines, for its members, appropriate ways in which to reach these goals. The strain occurs when there is an imbalance between the two components with a greater emphasis on the first. (Thio, 2006). This clearly can be applied to the cases of Glass and Blair. The world of journalism is filled with aspiring journalists; with the names of only a few becoming worldly renown. This pressure could easily encourage risk taking behaviors.

In researching these two incidents one may come across a long list of names attached to journalistic fraud. This could raise a question regarding the atmosphere of journalistic work places. In such consideration the Differential Association Theory could be considered as an explanation. This theory states that criminal behavior is learned, in interaction with other persons, within intimate groups, includes techniques and motives, includes all of the "mechanisms that are involved in any other learning", and is "an expression of general needs and values" (Thio, 2006). This cut throat industry could become a training course for creating juicy stories disregarding any specific percentage of truth. It may be that the list of names represents those that were caught. Articles such as these two depict an industry that ultimately holds individuals accountable for abiding by a code of ethics. Alternatively they present two individuals that were able to become quite successful within these companies and were only held accountable after questioned by outside investigations.

The Control Theory (Thio, 2006), focuses on a low bonding level of an individual on society. The elements of the bond include Attachment, involvement, commitment, and belief. The concept of right and wrong, in this case, is both determined for the individual by the culture within the work environment and the one outside of that environment. The people that he reports for, to, and upon all help to create the rules that should be followed. With the complexity of such nature it is understandable that within a given group one may act in a way that appears deviant within the rules dictated by that group. These individuals lacked commitment to their society. This is true whether analyzed is the society in which they report to and represent or any of its sub-groups. Glass and Blair both made obvious attempts to present themselves well within these groups but did so in a non-committal way.

Finally, the Rational Choice Theory is one in which consequences are weighed and decisions are made. If the consequences of committing the crime, good or bad, are better than the consequences of not then one may choose to commit it. Glass and Blair chose to succeed in their work. They chose to juggle work, school, and personal life. They chose to produce stories that would grasp the attention of all they answered to on a daily bases. They chose to make their names known. They are still choosing this, hence the book deals. The consequence was seemingly positive for the both of them. Quite possibly, never made clear is the actual consequence to crashing and burning from these choices. Regardless, to these individuals fading into the back ground never was a choice.

Stephan Glass and Jayson Blair, known now for journalistic fraud, share many characteristics. The way in which they were perceived inside and outside of their industry varies. Though there are assuredly many theories to represent this act of deviance among them are the Anomie-Strain Theory, Differential Association Theory, Control Theory, and the Rational Choice Theory. The question remains, did the individuals provide the industry with the behavior or did the industry teach it to them.

References

CBS News Aug. 17, 2003, 60 minutes: Stephan Glass: I Lied For Esteem. Retrieved March 31, 2007 from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/07/60minutes/main552819.shtml

The New York Times May 11, 2003. New York Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception. Retrieved March 31, 2007 from http://www.mishalov.com/jayson%20Blair.html

Thio, Alex, Calhoun, C. Thomas (2006). Readings in Deviant Behavior 4^th Edition. Pearsons Education Inc., USA

Wikipedia.Retrieved March 31, 2007 from http://www.wikipedia.org/ modified January 13, 2007.