ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING

ALEXIS B. ROMERO, M.A.

UST Journalism Department /
The Philippine Star
TOPIC OUTLINE

 The need for ethical frameworks

 The Four Classic Theories of Ethics

 Other ethical decision-making models

WHAT WILL YOU DO?
WHAT WILL YOU DO?

You are assigned to cover an

event of a businesswoman who
controls the company that is the
majority shareholder of your
media outlet.

She knows that you work for the

media entity controlled by her
company and she gives you
P5,000 after the event. She tells
you to take the money, saying it is
an “allowance” for your coverage.
THE NEED FOR ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS
- Frameworks play a role in journalists’ decision-making

- Ethical theories can back up your final decision on ethical dilemmas; your
answers should be informed by what others have written and experienced

- Tools offered by frameworks prevent a “quandary ethics” or the feeling that no

best choice is available and that everyone’s choice is equally valid

- Ethical codes have limits; some even have conflicting items (e.g. advocacy vs.
conflict of interest); ad hoc evaluations of actions; more universally applicable
help can be found in the writings of philosophers

- Frameworks will enhance the ethical toolkit you have developed by articulating
some of the most central frameworks for ethical reflection
(Patterson et al, 2019; Ess, 2020; Dickson, 1988)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS

(Foreman, 2016)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Deontology (Rule-Based / Duty-Based Thinking)

- A person has a duty to do the right thing – no excuses, no

exceptions, and no worrying about the consequences

- Obey ethical obligations regardless of the situation and in

spite of social conventions and natural inclinations to the contrary

- Also called duty-based thinking because of its emphasis on one’s

moral duty (from the Greek word deon or duty)

- Based on the notion that it is in the act itself, rather than the person
who acts, where moral force resides

- Action morally justified only if it was performed from duty; motive matters

(Foreman, 2016; Patterson et al, 2019)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Deontology (Rule-Based / Duty-Based Thinking)

“I ought never to act except in such a

way that I can also will that my
maxim should become universal law.”

CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE MAIN POINTS:

1. An individual should act as if the choices one

makes for oneself could become universal law.

2. You should act so that you treat each individual

as an end and never as merely a means.

(Foreman, 2016; Patterson et al, 2019)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Deontology (Rule-Based / Duty-Based Thinking)

- Immanuel Kant advocated respect for all and viewed every

person as intrinsically important as a human being.

- People should treat others with dignity and grant others the same
autonomy they enjoy

TWO KINDS OF DUTIES

 Meritorious – Positive duties (e.g. help others, abide by the rules)

 Strict – generally negative; more morally mandatory (e.g. do not lie, do not steal)

(Foreman, 2016; Patterson et al, 2019)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Deontology (Rule-Based / Duty-Based Thinking)

STRENGTHS

 Simple; decision-maker does not need to calculate possible consequences

of his decision

 The basis of notable movements like pacifism

 Kantian deontology supports the belief that there are ethical absolutes such
as human rights

WEAKNESSES

 Rigid; a person facing an ethical dilemma has no way to make a choice

 Many people are not always willing to accept absolutist views

(Foreman, 2016; Ess, 2020)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Utilitarianism (Ends-Based / Consequentialism)

- Allows decision-maker to weigh competing values according to

the consequences that might occur

- John Stuart Mill believes people should choose the greatest

happiness for the greatest number of people – the greatest
balance of pleasure over pain

- Happiness as the desirable value; the greatest good for the

greatest number

- Requires thoughtful consideration of who will be helped and who will be

harmed by a decision and to what degree

- Consequences of action are important in deciding whether they are

ethical
(Foreman, 2016; Patterson et al, 2019)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Utilitarianism (Ends-Based / Consequentialism)

- The ends can justify the means

- It is ethical to harm a person for the benefit of the larger group

- About trying to think through possible good and bad consequences

of possible acts, and then weighing them against one another to
determine which act will generate the more positive outcome

- Respect for minorities: Fair trial, against unjust persecution even

if it will make the majority happy

- Traditional version was hedonistic; eventually, other values

were viewed to have intrinsic worth like friendship, knowledge,
and health
(Foreman, 2016; Patterson et al, 2019; Ess. 2020)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Utilitarianism (Ends-Based / Consequentialism)

STRENGTHS

 Flexible; allows one to make a choice between competing ethical principles

 Provides a principle by which rightness and wrongness can be identified and

judged, conflicts can be resolved and exceptions can be decided

 Since the theory suggests that no one’s happiness is any more valuable than
anyone else’s, it has a way of puncturing entrenched self-interest

WEAKNESSES

 Can be manipulated by self-serving rationalizations, social selfishness

 Hard to predict consequences of one’s actions; For whom are the

consequences to be considered? How do you quantify consequences?

 Can lead to ethical gridlock when dealing with equally strong claims
(Foreman, 2016; Ess, 2020; Christians, 2017)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Mean

- Virtue in moderation: Find the mean between an excess and a deficiency

- Aristotle: Virtuous person learns to avoid extremes in a given situation

- Practical reason is exercised by people who understood virtues and

demonstrated them in their lives and calling

- To determine the golden mean, one has to exercise practical wisdom,

act according to high standards, and act in accordance with firm and
continuing character traits

- Virtue ethics as agent-oriented; right actions are results of an agent

seeking virtue and accomplishing it

(Foreman, 2016; Patterson et al, 2019)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Mean

“We learn an art or craft by doing the things that we shall have to do when we
have learnt it: for instance, men become builders by building houses, harpers
by playing on the harp. Similarly we become just by doing just acts, temperate
by doing temperate acts, brave by doing brave acts.”
- Aristotle (from Nicomachean Ethics)

DEFICIENCY MEAN EXCESS

Cowardice Courage Foolhardiness
Secrecy Honesty Loquacity
Quarrelsomeness Friendship Flattery
Indecisiveness Self-control Impulsiveness
Stinginess Generosity Extravagance
Obsessiveness Perseverance Laziness

(Patterson et al, 2019)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Mean

Three troublesome areas of journalism ethics where the Golden

Mean is applicable:

 When news coverage of a particular event continues hour after hour,

day after day, when there is little or no new information to add to the
story and when one story predominates to the exclusion of other major
news stories

 When news stories, photograph, or videos have little or no significance

outside their shock value

 When stories contribute to existing stereotypes by defective or too little

coverage

(Dickson, 1988)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Mean

STRENGTHS

 Practical; can be used to resolve some ethical dilemmas

 Still relevant in the so-called age of relativism; argues that some

personal choices are morally superiors to others

 The fairest and most reasonable option for honorably resolving disputes

WEAKNESSES

 Not applicable in some situations; no compromise in some issues

 Some issues are not amenable to a center (e.g. extreme oppression,

terrorism, intrinsically wicked acts)

(Foreman, 2016; Christians, 2017)

FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Rule

- “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”

- Imagine yourself in the place of the person affected by your decision,

and, from that perspective, assess the fairness of your decision

- Use restraint and self-discipline to avoid inflicting harm; love as the

moral base of conduct

- In classical Confucian thought, human beings are understood first of

all as relational beings: we are who we are always and only as we
are taken up in specific relationships with others

- Ethics is primarily about becoming a complete human being by

cultivating the behaviors and attitudes required for establishing
harmony among members of the human community
(Foreman, 2016; Christians et al, 2017)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Rule

“If you don’t want to be lied to or deceived, don’t lie

to or deceive others. If you want others to keep
their commitments to you, keep your commitments
to them.”
- Michael Josephson

(Foreman, 2016)
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Rule


CHRISTIANITY
 TAOISM

HINDUISM
All things whatsoever ye would Regard your neighbor’s gain as your This is the sum of duty; do naught
that men should do to you, do ye gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your onto others what you would not
so to them; for this is the law and own loss. -Tai Shang Kan Yin P’ien have them do unto you.
the prophets. - Matthew 7:1 - Mahabharata 5,1517


BUDDHISM
 ISLAM

JUDAISM
Hurt not others in ways that you No one of you is a believer until he What is hateful to you, do not do to
yourself would find hurtful. desires for his brother that which he your fellowman. This is the entire
- Udana-Varga 5,1 desires for himself. - Sunnah Law… -Talmud, Shabbat 3id
FOUR CLASSIC THEORIES OF ETHICS
Golden Rule

STRENGTHS

 Has a broad application in journalism

 Universal; “the best single rule of ethical decision making”

 Simple; the only rule of ethics many people profess to know

WEAKNESSES

 Not helpful when journalists are reporting on a situation in which two or

more stakeholders have competing interests

 Not applicable when exposing the irregularities of public figures

(Foreman, 2016)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Bok’s Model

- Based on two premises:

 We must have empathy for the people involved in ethical decisions

 Maintaining social trust is a fundamental goal

- Ethical questions should be analyzed in three steps:

 Consult your conscience about the “rightness” of an action (How do

you feel about the action?).

 Seek experts advice for alternatives to the act creating the ethical
problem (Is there another professionally acceptable way to achieve
the same goal that will not raise ethical issues?)

 If possible, conduct a public discussion with the parties involved in SISSELA BOK
the dispute (How will others respond to the proposed act?). You
can conduct the conversation hypothetically in your head
(Patterson et al, 2019)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Bok’s Model

Two cautions in using Bok’s model:

 It is important to go through all three steps before making a

final choice. Most of us make ethical choices prematurely,
after we’ve consulted only our consciences, an error Bok
says results in a lot of flabby moral thinking

 While you will not be endowed with any clairvoyant

powers to anticipate your ethical problems, the ethical
dialogue outlined in the third step is best when
conducted in advance of the event, not in the heat of
writing a story.

(Patterson et al, 2019)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Pluralistic Theory of Value
- William Ross’ framework is said to be a link between
deontology and consequentialism

- There is more than one ethical value competing for

preeminence in our ethical decision-making

- Competing ethical values or duties are equal provided that

the circumstances of the moral choice are equal

TWO KINDS OF DUTIES

 Prima Facie – Right because of the nature of the act itself;
universal (e.g. keeping promises, telling the truth, obeying the law)

 Duty proper / actual – paramount given specific circumstances; WILLIAM ROSS

contextual; The prima facie duty judged to be "more incumbent
than any other" in the situation; based on one’s perspectives (Patterson et al, 2019)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Pluralistic Theory of Value

- Right refers to actions, something undertaken by persons

motivated by correct reasons and on careful reflection;
seen not done

- Good refers to an objective, if indefinable quality present in

all acts; since persons are not omniscient, we cannot know
all possible outcomes, and thus, not all right actions will
result in good acts.

“Whether a person’s action is morally justifiable is

a deontological question; whether the act is good
is ultimately a consequentialist question…If one
sincerely undertakes to make the right choice…
one cannot be blamed if the right action does not
produce a good act.” – Christopher Meyers
(Patterson et al, 2019; Meyers, 2003)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Pluralistic Theory of Value

ROSS’ TYPOLOGY OF DUTIES

 Fidelity – based on implicit or explicit promise

 Reparation – arising from a previous wrongful act

 Gratitude – rests on previous acts of others

 Justice – arise from the necessity to ensure equitable

and meritorious distribution of pleasure or happiness

 Beneficence – rests on the fact that there are others

in the world whose lot we can better

 Self-improvement – rests on the fact that we can

improve our own condition

 Non-maleficence – duty of not injuring others

(Patterson et al, 2019; Meyers, 2003)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Communitarianism

- Seeks to provide ethical guidance when confronting the sort of society-wide issues that mark
current political and business activity

- Persons have certain inescapable claims on one another that cannot be renounced except
at the cost of their humanity

- When issues are political and social, community interests trump individual interests but does
not trample them.

- Focus on the outcome of individual ethical decisions analyzed in light of their potential to
impact society

- Social justice as the predominant moral value

(Patterson et al, 2019)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Communitarianism

- Recognizes the value of process but are just as concerned with outcomes

- The ability of individual acts to create a more just society is an appropriate measure of their
rightness and outcomes are part of the calculus

- Allows ethical discussion to include altruism and benevolence on an equal footing with more
traditional questions like truth-telling and loyalty

- Journalism cannot separate itself from the politics and economic system of which it is part;
allows journalists to understand their institutional role and to evaluate their performance
against shared societal values

- Mutes competition among journalistic outlets and provides a new agenda for news; tied
to civic journalism,
(Patterson et al, 2019)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Communitarianism

“Communitarian thinking makes it possible to ask whether current

practice (for example, a traditional definition of news) provides a good
mechanism for a community to discover itself, learn about itself, and
ultimately transform itself.”
- Philip Patterson, Lee Wilkins, and Chad Painter

(Patterson et al, 2019)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Potter Box

- Moral reasoning model developed by Ralph B. Potter of the

Harvard Divinity School formulated the model of moral reasoning

- Highlights the need to identify and consider all factors in a

situation before making a decision

Definition Loyalties

Values Principles
RALPH POTTER

(Christians, 2017)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Potter Box

ELEMENTS

 Definition – Details, information, facts of the situation, how it happened

 Values – Journalistic values (e.g. timely release of info, truth, minimizing

harm); helps temper biases or prejudices; values of the parties involved;
values that drive or aggravate the situation

 Principles – Philosophies, ethical concepts that apply to the situation

 Loyalties – Who the decision maker / journalist is loyal to

NOTE:
Not all views may be considered; not everyone has the same values

(Christians, 2017)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Potter Box
CHRISTINE DACERA’S DEATH

Definition Loyalties
Christine Dacera Murder? Public Employer
23 years old Natural cause? Sources Self
PAL flight attendant 11 companions
Died January 1, 2021 Makati Med
City Garden Grand Hotel bath tub

Values Principles
Right to know Due process / enforce law Golden rule
Accuracy Justice Deontology / Human dignity
Fairness Decency Utilitarianism / Consequences
Minimize harm Privacy
Personal values
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Systematic Moral Analysis

- Proposed by Deni Elliott and David Ozar

- Based on the premises that journalists make choices

that cause physical, financial or reputational harm
and that journalism fulfills a vital social function

- Aims to answer three basic questions:

 Whom do the members of the profession serve?

 What good do they do for those they serve?

 What is the ideal relationship between the

professional and the person served?

(Elliot and Ozar, 2010)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Systematic Moral Analysis

- Journalism serves the public, people of the society specifically regarded as engaging in actions
that actually or at least potentially affect other persons in the society

- Journalism’s commitment: Serve all the people, the society as a whole, and to relate to that society
precisely insofar as people’s actions actually or potentially affect the lives of others in the society

- One of the central values of journalism that good journalists provide to the public is information

 Making discerning pursuit and effectively disseminating needed information

 Sufficiently attending to society’s pulse to clearly and effectively convey common social desires

 Enhancing clients’ autonomy by reporting on vital info and acting as a watchdog of powerful institutions

 Drawing upon and powerfully conveying those human interest stories that serve to build community

- The ideal relationship, the one that journalists are committed to building between themselves
and the people they serve is a collaborative relationship
(Elliot and Ozar, 2010)
OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Systematic Moral Analysis

1. Identify the courses of action available to

the journalist or the news organization in
the situation.

2. Ask yourself: Of which type is the action to

be undertaken?

(Elliot and Ozar, 2010)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Systematic Moral Analysis

I. Identify the courses of action available to the journalist or news organization in the situation.

1. Does the action fulfill one or more of the professional journalist’s role-related responsibilities?

a. Is the action serving the public, that is, the poor of the society in which the journalist practices? Or are the
actions serving only the preferences of an individual or a sub-group within the society

b. Does the action address the central values of journalism? Are there other available actions that would more
effectively maximize these values for the public? If several central values are involved, does this action rank
information the society needs above the other values?

c. Does the action employ and facilitate a collaborative relationship between the journalist and the audience? Or
does it negate or inhibit such a relationship? Are there other available actions that would do this better?

2. Will the action cause potential emotional, physical , financial, or reputational harm?

(Elliot and Ozar, 2010)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Systematic Moral Analysis

I. Identify the courses of action available to the journalist or news organization in the situation.

3. Is causing this harm justified?

a. Does the intended action respect all persons affected? Does it treat all persons in the situation consistently
and impartially?

b. Is each person getting what he or she is entitled to? Does the intended action promote the good overall? Do the
agent’s action promote the aggregate good of the community? Are people getting what they have a legal and
moral right to have? Are they getting what they deserve, including the outcomes of any promises made to them?
Are they being treated impartially? What overall good is promoted by this action? What overall harm will come if
the action is not taken?

c. What would your moral or professional heroes do?

d. Is each person in the situation getting what he or she needs? How can we devise a solution that addresses each
person’s needs, and most particularly, the needs of the most vulnerable? Does the intended actions promote
relationship, and does it promote community? Does it promote trust among people? Is the process of decision
making itself respectful of everyone involved?

(Elliot and Ozar, 2010)

OTHER ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Systematic Moral Analysis
II. Given the answers to the above questions, of which type is this action?

1. Ethically prohibited
- Action would be just wrong to do in this case

2. Ethically required
- Only by taking one of these actions will the practitioner be able to fulfill the role-related responsibilities

3. Ethically permitted
- Actions that fulfill role-related responsibilities without causing unjustified harm; may overlap with “ethically
required” scope of possibilities

4. Ethically ideal
- Actions that go beyond doing what is required or permitted in that ideal actions prevent harms rather
than merely not causing them or they address other harms caused as well
(Elliot and Ozar, 2010)
MAKING SOUND ETHICAL DECISIONS

“Everyone who works any length of time in journalism can expect to be

confronted by a public official, a business executive, or an ordinary citizen
who fiercely opposes a course of action that the journalist thinks is in the
public interest. When that happens, the journalist has a duty to give a
carefully reasoned response – to show… that the decision had been
rationally made by a caring individual.”
- Gene Foreman

(Foreman, 2016)
FORMATIVE PAPER

Apply the ethical concepts and principles you have

learned by writing a commentary that answers the
following question: “Should journalists push for
advocacies other than those related to journalism
(e.g. freedom of expression, access to information,
ensuring the safety of media practitioners)?”

The submission should cite at least ten credible

references using the APA style and should NOT
exceed 800 words.

Submit your paper through the Blackboard course

site on or before 3 p.m. of March 19, 2021.