|
|
|
|
|
|
by exstudent2
3922 days ago
|
|
|
> You do understand, right, that your standards and expectations for disclosure have nothing to do with any recognized standard for journalistic ethics, right? Pulitzer disagrees with you. From http://pulitzercenter.org/about-us/ethics-and-standards-poli... CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Normal activities - outside work, investments, political activism - pose special problems for journalists. Often, it's best to avoid activities that might interfere with your ability to function as a journalist. Alternatively, you may be precluded from working on certain topics for the Pulitzer Center if you're personally involved. A third alternative is public disclosure of any information that a site user might find relevant in understanding the content. Someone who is writing about a relative would need to disclose the relationship. A guest contributor writing about politics would need to disclose if he is associated with a candidate, and any employment or other financial relationship that could be viewed as related to the topic being reported. Full disclosure of relevant information is standard practice for the Pulitzer Center - a necessary step but not always sufficient when a potential conflict of interest exists. |
|
|
No they don't.
> Full disclosure of relevant information is standard practice for the Pulitzer Center
Wake me when political or economic writers disclose which candidates and politicians they know and voted for, or when film writers disclose the names of all the PR people who they talk to, or any of the other relationships that aren't routinely disclosed because they're not material. "relevant information" does not mean "anything and everything".
I repeat: your standards and expectations for disclosure have nothing to do with any recognized standard for journalistic ethics.