1. I would read the papers first and then decide whether or not to use them, because there is no guarantee that this opportunity will come up again.
2. Yes, I would take the job as an orderly. If the occupants of the nursing home are being subjected to substandard living conditions the public has a right to know and to stop it from continuing.
3. Whether it was from a written source or a website, I would always give credit to the point of origin, otherwise it is plagiarism.
From E-mail: I would not reveal the name of the teacher that is being accused. Nothing in the scenario confirmed that the professor actually harassed the student, so revealing his name without hard evidence would be libelous.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1) Yeah, maybe ... but be cautious about something like this. Potential sources could decide that you're not trustworthy.
ReplyDelete2) Be very careful on this one — this may sound like the "just" thing to do, but applying for a job without revealing that you are a reporter can get you (and your news organization) sued for misrepresentation. That’s exactly what happened in the Food Lion case. ( Link to the Freedom Forum analysis of this case.) The better course is to find a source.
3) That's right!
Libel: You're right to suggest removing the professor's name, but identifying him as a chemistry professor would also probably be a dead giveaway. Instead, you need to find out if Karen Hart has filed an official complaint. Until then, this is just an unsupported allegation ... and that makes this story potentially libelous.
Ethics: 12/15
Libel: 8/10