Response to the “Code of Ethics”

The Neutral Viewpoint by Journalist

             In the chapter 18 ‘Strangest Hybrid’, the chapter dictates how culturists researched on cell and hybrid cell fusion and how culturists were restricted by the media. Culturists found out cell fusion when cells are cultured together, and they tried to combine different species. They succeeded, they got cross hybrid cell. Some of them were HeLa and animals. One day, mass media disclosure this happening with a shocking title, ‘Man-Animal Cells are bred in Lab… The Next Step could be Tree Men… Scientists Create Monsters’. Then, culturists were restricted to do those researches.

             Code of Ethics, by Society of Professional Journalists’, shows us what journalists must keep and what journalists must follow. In my opinion, those mass media kept their duty to publish the truth to public, but the title and the way of delivering the message was slanted. Actually, the only way public can know a procedure of science is by mass media. Except people related to science, public don’t participate in science conference. Public usually read article or magazine to know science, so mass media should be balanced. Mass media have duties, such as sending message correctly, a purpose of an object, and a neutral viewpoint. Mass media never distort the truth. At that time, those mass media did good job to publish the truth how scientific research was going on, but those were imbalanced. Of course, a result of the research could be bad ending, like tree men. However, their purpose was to map genetic traits to specific chromosomes, and make genome map so that scientist could find out a function of DNA and chromosome. To be sure, some scientists could make those hybrid cell born, but mass media cannot blur an essential purpose of scientist who started research with pure curiosity. ‘Tree Men’ is just one of possibility, like a remedy of cancer. For some public, the news could be scaring, but the news could be redemption for patients and their family. Mass media must not be in silence. Mass media should be a prattler and a messenger with a neutral viewpoint. One side opinion by mass media is against a rule of journalism. The judgment is for public.