Ethics Questions: CNN and the President’s Trip to Kenya

CNN’s coverage last week of President Obama’s trip to Kenya sparked some controversy when a report referred the Kenya as a “hotbed of terror.” According to Poynter, complaints on Twitter and the hashtag #SomeoneTellCNN, led to a change in the headline and lead of the article. The edited version implies that the region is under a terror threat, instead of only focusing on Kenya.

This article raises a few ethical question regarding transparency, accountability and truth. First, with seeking to tell the truth CNN based its report on terror threats in the region on apparent U.S. air attacks and information from defense officials. My first question is where is the information about these air attacks, which “may be timed to the President’s visit,” according to the CNN report, coming from. Is this just speculation or coming from a real source? The article, quoting defense officials, isn’t very clear.

The article is prefaced by a brief editor’s note, explaining the changes to the headline and lead. It’s obvious with the public response that the article struck a nerve. It seems like CNN made a strong judgement about a country, and a region, by labeling it a “hotbed of terror.” Even that language is strong. The note from the editor is one way that CNN is being accountable and transparent about the report, and the changes made, but does it go far enough?

Lastly, I wonder if there were any concerns raised about this article appearing before the President’s visit? Could it lead any potential risks to Obama during his visit? The article also says that “U.S. officials do not believe Al-Shabaab can get anywhere near the President, but there are others reasons to worry.” Before publishing information like this, should a discussion of the President’s safety take place at CNN? Can the argument be made for not publishing this report, or is informing the public more important?

Advertisements

One thought on “Ethics Questions: CNN and the President’s Trip to Kenya

  1. Bill Mitchell says:

    Good issues here, Jess. I’d frame your last question a bit differently. Instead of:
    Can the argument be made for not publishing this report, or is informing the public more important?

    Why not:
    How might we publish this news in ways that inform the public and minimize risk?

    No e in judgment, by the way.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s