Columbia J-School: Exam Do-Over
A new (and seemingly extremely loaded) essay question has been distributed to the class.
Exam Essay Question III:Write an essay of up to 500 words addressing the following situation:
You are the executive editor of a newspaper. You receives a tip from a credible source that one or more unspecified articles in recent editions of the newspaper contain fabricated material. No more detailsare given. Although word of the allegation quickly spreads through the newsroom, no one on the reporting staff admits to responsibility. As executive editor, what are your concerns and what do you do? Why? What are your expectations of the staff's reaction to the situation and your response to it?
Be sure to justify the actions you choose to take.
You are allowed to use your own brain and whatever other nonhuman sources you want in preparing this essay, but you are not allowed to discuss it with other human beings.
The essay will be evaluated as part of the final exam. It is due by 5:00pm, Thursday, December 7, and should be placed in the box labeled "Critical Issues Essays" in the deanery on the 7th floor.
The memos leading up to today's meeting follow.
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 20:38:10 -0500 From: David KlatellSubject: [j_school] FW: Critical Issues - December 1 To: J-School Students I want to reiterate: this meeting is required of all students in the Friday section of Critical Issues (those in the evening section are exempted). We have encountered a serious problem with the final exam, and will not register a passing grade in the course for anyone who does not attend.
Sincerely,David A. Klatell Vice Dean Professor of Professional Practice Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism 2950 Broadway New York, NY 10027 Tel: (212) 854-3319 Fax: (212) 854-3939 E-mail: dak25@columbia.edu
-----Original Message----- From: mgh2@columbia.edu [mailto:mgh2@columbia.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 5:29 PM To: dak25@columbia.edu Subject: Critical Issues - December 1
Dear Critical Issues Students,Professor Freedman will be holding a special session of Critical Issues on Friday, December 1, from 1:45-2:45 p.m. in the Lecture Hall.
Attendance is mandatory.
We know this was not previously scheduled, but we expect everyone to attend.
(This message is associated with Critical Issues in Journalism)
















"The journalism school administration has asked its journalism students not to talk to journalists"
This is utterly pathetic.
"The journalism school administration has asked its journalism students not to talk to journalists"
It is also utterly untrue. I am a student at the school. The administration said nothing of the sort. You may want to have a little chat with your "reporter at the scene" about the ethics of making things up.
"The journalism school administration has asked its journalism students not to talk to journalists"
As already stated, that is completely untrue. The adminstration explicitly told students that they were free to talk to the press. Also, people started leaving at 2:45, when the session was technically over, though others stayed later. Also, the adminstration received a phone call, not an email. Besides that, I'm sure you all got a few facts right... really. Somewhere.
As a member of the J-School's Class of 2007 I am appalled at the media response to this pretty minute situation. We learned (yes, in Ethics) about the rumor mill that influenced the MSM in the wake of Katrina and somehow, we have elevated a small situation which involved a handful of students into a schoolwide fiasco. It reminds me of when I used to play the "telephone" game as a kid. It starts out with "oh, one or two people cheated" to "alert the media, this is the j-school cheating scandal." It's absolutely ridiculous on all fronts. But, as one professor pointed out, you can't put the toothpaste back into the tube. So, I guess we just deal with it. Also, regardless of whether the school finds out who/how many students were/are involved, it is apparent that most students have not grasped the overarching lesson to be learned--in the session today, students focused on finding out who told the administration, not who did the cheating. If we are ethical, as the vehement discussion that was had this afternoon suggests, why don't we feel the need to focus on those who actually had the unfair advantage?
As for you, Columbia Journalism School is an open forum for discussion and this is adamantly encouraged by faculty and administration. At NO time and I repeat NO time were we told not to talk to reporters. We were told, however, to think about how our words will impact how others view the school. So, get your reporting correct. If J-Schoolers were not talking, you can't assume that it's because they were told not to talk to the media. Instead, you say no J-Schoolers were willing to comment on the situation. In fact, it might not be too late for you to apply to the J-School for next year's class? Just a thought...
So...ummm...I guess this point has gotten across by now...but in case it has not, your reporter just made up her own facts. Ethical?
I
Your "reporter on the scene" has completely fabricated a story because there was no story. A few students behaved improperly. Was it wrong? Yes. Is it a scandal? No.
No, these other j-schoolers have it all wrong!!! The facutly most certainly did order us to keep our mouths shut and shut tight. They told us the media are bad, bad people and that we should consider professions as ethicists instead.
Come on guys! How are we ever gonna be real journalists when we can't even get our stories straight? Uh ... did anybody finish the test yet? I want to see if my answer is right. This class is so haaaaard!
Isn't it possible that someone who's really bright, understands the subject and writes well managed to hand in the article (500 words? *please.*) one hour before deadline?
Also: two bits says this story shows up as part of a story line on CSI/L&O.