Categories
Other / journalism

The controversial set of images was released at an exhibit in san diego, california, and a few months later, a more graphic version was released in berlin, germany.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, PETA, is a nonprofit animal rights organization known for its controversial approach to communications and public relations. In 2003, PETA launched a new campaign, named “Holocaust on Your Plate,” that compared the slaughter of animals for human use to the murder of 6 million Jews during World War II. The campaign centered around the power of emotion, and Lisa Lange, the vice president of PETA communications, stated that “The idea for the effort came from the late Nobel Prize-winning author Isaac Bashevis Singer, who wrote: ‘In relation to them [animals], all people are Nazis; for them it is an eternal Treblinka’ — a death camp in Poland” (CNN, 2003).’” A Jewish PETA member funded the campaign, but this did not lessen the backlash from the Jewish community toward the set of images.
“Holocaust on Your Plate” juxtaposed 60-square-foot visual displays of animals in slaughterhouses with scenes of Nazi concentration camps. Lange explained that the campaign “is shocking, startling, and very hard to look at. We’re attacking the mind-set that condones the slaughter of animals” (CNN, 2003). The controversial set of images was released at an exhibit in San Diego, California, and a few months later, a more graphic version was released in Berlin, Germany. The Central Council of Jews in Germany sued PETA in 2004 for the campaign, and in 2009, the German Supreme Court banned the images from the country. Germany’s PETA group appealed the European Court’s ruling, fighting for their right to display their campaign based on the fundamental principles of free speech. In November 2012, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg voted to uphold the Supreme Court ruling banning the campaign.
A Public Relations representative for PETA, alongside the CEO of the company, justified the campaign by describing it on CNN as “The very same mind-set that made the Holocaust possible — that we can do anything we want to those we decide are ‘different or inferior’ — is what allows us to commit atrocities against animals every single day.” PETA stated that its argument was based upon principles of truth. PETA essentially claimed that its campaign, although provocative, used a comparison relating the murder of Jews and animals in a truthful and justified manner.
The United States Anti-Defamation League and several other American human rights groups condemned the campaign, stating that the mass murder of millions of humans cannot, and should not be compared to a chicken or pig. The two main outcomes that may arise from this case: 1) PETA’s campaign spreads its pathos-driven message on animal rights successfully, limiting the number of animals consumed by humans, or 2) The campaign angers audiences to a degree that PETA loses the respect and trust that is needed for any form of audience support to ensue
Is “Holocaust on Your Plate” ethically wrong? Can you ethically justify using the mass-murder of millions in a catastrophic historical event as a communication tool to gain support for one’s organization? When? Explain fully, supporting your argument, and discussing the different ethical considerations for a PR or advertising campaign as opposed to a news story. You must cite at least one ethical code in your response.
Legal Reading: Chapter 17 in textbook
Ethics Reading: Read the following ethics codes: Public Relations Society of America: https://www.prsa.org/ethics/code-of-ethics/; American Advertising Federation: https://ams.aaaa.org/eweb/upload/inside/standards.pdf
Reading about Conflicts of Interest: https://rtdna.org/content/guidelines_for_avoiding_conflict_of_interest
use only ethical codes and specific chapter to answer question

Categories
Other / journalism

Use only textbook and ethical codes to cite

Instructions: Answer this assignment fully and carefully. You must cite at least one legal case or fact from the textbook (including page number) in your legal response and one ethical code (indicate which code you are citing and include the section) in your ethical response. Response should be one page or less.
Find one advertisement (print, radio, television, internet – any media source) that you believe is false, misleading or deceptive. Discuss whether your advertisement is entitled to First Amendment protection. Please attach your advertisement, or a description of your advertisement (if you heard it on the radio) to your response. If you were in the Advertising Acceptability Department of the media outlet that ran the ad, would you have accepted this ad? Explain why or why not.
Use only textbook and ethical codes to cite
Legal Reading: Chapter 17 in textbook
Ethics Reading: Read the following ethics codes:
Public Relations Society of America: https://www.prsa.org/ethics/code-of-ethics/
American Advertising Federation: https://ams.aaaa.org/eweb/upload/inside/standards.pdf
Reading about Conflicts of Interest: https://rtdna.org/content/guidelines_for_avoiding_conflict_of_interest
use only ethical codes and specific reading from textbook
cite like this: CNN terminated Chris Cuomo after reports surfaced that he helped his brother, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, during his sexual harassment allegations. Through his connections at CNN and other news outlets, Chris warned Andrew, in advance, of upcoming media that was about to be released, so Andrew could prepare for how to respond to these statements. In addition to the news that would be published on CNN, he gathered stories about his brother that might be relayed by other journalists. As well as this, Chris used CNN’s contacts and resources to gather information on Andrew’s accusers.
In order to avoid the ethical lapse, CNN could have fired Chris as soon as the news outlet became aware of Chris’ suspicious behavior. CNN knew Chris was offering advice to his brother’s staff. The news outlet responded by saying, “When Chris admitted to us that he had offered advice to his brother’s staff, he broke our rules and we acknowledged that publicly. But we also appreciated the unique position he was in and understood his need to put family first and job second” (New York Times). Chris probably thought he could get away with this situation since he did not receive any severe consequences, so he became more involved in his brother’s scandal. He was ultimately suspended because documents indicated a greater level of engagement than CNN had previously known. The situation could have been avoided if CNN had dismissed Chris when they first discovered he was helping Andrew.
The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics under Act Independently states, “Journalists should avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts”. According to Chris, there would be a conflict if he reported on the sexual harassment. Despite not covering his brother’s scandal directly, he still took part in it by gathering information to assist Andrew.

Categories
Other / journalism

The photos had been taken by first responders at the crash site on their personal cellphones and forwarded to colleagues, who shared them with others.

Instructions: Answer this assignment fully and carefully. You must cite at least one legal case or fact from the textbook (including page number) in your legal response and one ethical code (indicate which code you are citing and include the section) in your ethical response. Each response should be approximately one page.
Vanessa Bryant sued media outlets for publishing pictures of the bodies of her husband NBA legend Kobe Bryant and their 13-year-old daughter Gianna, who were killed in a helicopter crash on January 26, 2020. The photos had been taken by first responders at the crash site on their personal cellphones and forwarded to colleagues, who shared them with others. The photos were published by the media outlets in connection with news stories about the crash.
Fully analyze all legal and ethical claims in connection with the publication by the media outlets of the photos. This assignment will be submitted in two parts.
respond from a strictly legal standpoint, whether Vanessa Bryant would have a claim for publication of private facts (Chapter 4) or publicity (Chapter 5). The legal response is worth 5 points.
respond from a strictly ethical standpoint, whether the media outlets did the right thing in publishing the photographs (irrespective of whether there could be a successful legal claim). You must cite at least one ethical code in your response. The ethics response is worth 5 points. Total points for assignment: 10 points.
Cite like this: Cite like this: CNN terminated Chris Cuomo after reports surfaced that he helped his brother, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, during his sexual harassment allegations. Through his connections at CNN and other news outlets, Chris warned Andrew, in advance, of upcoming media that was about to be released, so Andrew could prepare for how to respond to these statements. In addition to the news that would be published on CNN, he gathered stories about his brother that might be relayed by other journalists. As well as this, Chris used CNN’s contacts and resources to gather information on Andrew’s accusers.
In order to avoid the ethical lapse, CNN could have fired Chris as soon as the news outlet became aware of Chris’ suspicious behavior. CNN knew Chris was offering advice to his brother’s staff. The news outlet responded by saying, “When Chris admitted to us that he had offered advice to his brother’s staff, he broke our rules and we acknowledged that publicly. But we also appreciated the unique position he was in and understood his need to put family first and job second” (New York Times). Chris probably thought he could get away with this situation since he did not receive any severe consequences, so he became more involved in his brother’s scandal. He was ultimately suspended because documents indicated a greater level of engagement than CNN had previously known. The situation could have been avoided if CNN had dismissed Chris when they first discovered he was helping Andrew.
Use only the specific chapters and ethical laws for assignment

Categories
Other / journalism

In her lawsuit, bialik claims she never endorsed cannabidiol products, is not currently doing so, and has no plans to do so in the future.

Actress Mayim Bialik (of The Big Bang Theory and Jeopardy!) filed a lawsuit in July 2022 in federal court in Florida seeking money damages against various websites and online marketers that used her name and picture to promote their CBD products, including Mayim Bialik CBD Gummies. In her lawsuit, Bialik claims she never endorsed cannabidiol products, is not currently doing so, and has no plans to do so in the future. Does Bialik have a claim for publicity? Explain what the elements of the legal claim are and whether Bialik should win, citing a page from Chapter 5 of the textbook.
Only use Chapter 5 to answer and ethical codes

Categories
Other / journalism

Instructions: Respond to the following case study fully and carefully. You must

Instructions: Respond to the following case study fully and carefully. You must cite at least one legal case or fact from the textbook (including page number) in your legal response and one ethical code (indicate which code you are citing and include the section) in your ethical response. Response should be approximately one page.
Case Study: On July 26, 2021, VICE Media published an online news story titled “Police Are Telling ShotSpotter to Alter Evidence from Gunshot-Detecting AI.” The article described how ShotSpotter, a company that partners with law enforcement agencies nationwide to implement a network of gunfire-detecting acoustic sensors to monitor and notify police of gunshots and to enable faster responses, has exhibited a “pattern” of “altering” gunshot alerts at the request of police departments. The article labeled ShotSpotter data as “untested evidence” and stated that prosecutors have been “forced to withdraw” ShotSpotter evidence during trials. On July 26, 2021, a VICE editor also posted three promotional tweets about the article and VICE’s CYBER podcast released an episode focusing on the article.
On October 11, 2021, ShotSpotter filed a lawsuit against VICE Media in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, alleging libel based on the article, the tweets and the podcast. In its lawsuit, ShotSpotter sought $50 million in general damages, $50 million for future lost profits, $100 million for lost enterprise value, $100,000 for expenses incurred for combatting a disinformation campaign, and $100 million for punitive damages.
Your Questions: What elements does ShotSpotter have to establish to make its libel case in the U.S.? What defenses could VICE raise? Should ShotSpotter win? Why or why not? After analyzing the legal claim, discuss all of the ethical issues raised for you about VICE’s publication of the article.