Mayhill Fowler's Recordings: The Ethics Behind It

The Los Angeles Times published an article about citizen journalist Mayhill Fowler, and how she got the inside scoop on Bill Clinton and Obama in 2008. The article highlight what exactly she recorded, and how she interpreted the information based on her oven personal bias. however it's clear the main point of focus in the discussion is surrounding her methods of obtaining such information — and the ethics behind it. 

The article quoted Fowler herself saying, "He just thought we were all average, ordinary Americans who had come out to see him. And, of course, in one sense, that is what I am."

She's right, That is what she is — an average ordinary American. She just also happens to be a citizen journalist, which in my opinion is a journalist nonetheless. 

The role of a journalist, especially independent ones, are to uncover truths that mainstream media may have covered up or just ignored all together. I believe this issue would have been one of those ignored it if weren't for people like Fowler. 

In terms of ethics, from an official journalistic stand point, the SPJ code of ethics preamble states the following: 

"Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity."

When you dissect that paragraph and look at the essentials, Fowlers reports were ethically sound. The key terms being: public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice, free exchange of information, accurate, fair, thorough, and integrity. From these few points I agree to the justification that what she did was ethical. 

Another LA Times article collections states, " Fowler was not sure she would report the statements because, she said, she was not sure she could capture their proper context" However, "Huffington Post editors said they confirmed that Fowler had reported Obama's statements precisely and that their citizen reporter had conducted herself properly." 

I can understand how maybe in 2008, although the boom had already happened, people could potentially see Fowlers actions as unethical, yet at the end of the day, she acted with integrity and used her free speech to enlighten and inform the public.  Honestly I think it would be unethical to keep the ideas to herself. Because then, that tis what should be considered unfair. 

Without her reports — which she did manage to objectively state her opinion against her own choice candidate — information that the public was deserving of, may have gone without comment. 

He may have thought they "were all average, ordinary Americans ", but it's the average and the ordinary that have the ability to make the upmost impact in today's society.