My job vs my conscience

[Xooiid]

I am facing a bit of a conundrum.

Within the next week, Donald Rumsfeld will be doing a book signing on the post that I am assigned to for his new memoir. Being as our other writers are also covering stories, and the fact that I'm the senior writer in my shop, I've been tasked to get the story from the event.

On one hand, it really is a good story from the military perspective: A notable figure in our nation is coming to our post to interact with the community here. Sure, he's selling a book as a part of it, but he's still taking time to visit the troops and families over here.

On the other hand, he was the man who played a pivotal role in the invasion of Iraq for less than honest reasons, not to mention the fact that his defense department essentially forgot about Afghanistan in the process, setting our progress there back years. For the effect that had on our military, not to mention our country, I cannot help but be angry at the man.

Now, I am going to do the story, and I will make it the best story I possibly can. I will report on the facts, use the good quotes, and give everyone a good feeling about the event. But it doesn't make me comfy. I just wanted to vent a little about how I felt on the situation.

Thanks for listening to my rant.

 

[Dimitriov]

I can't know exactly how you feel, but I can certainly sympathize. Personally, I wouldn't want to be in that position either.

I guess just do the best job you can, with honesty and integrity, and without bias.

 

[Grospoliner]

Always remain objective.

 

[Cazza]

In your job you should put your feelings aside. Thats what you're paid to do.

 

[Ambi]

Why use only "good" quotes? Did your boss actually tell you to only use the quotes in favour of Rumsfeld and make people warm up to the event? Maybe you could get a friend who sees eye-to-eye on the issue to be there so you could ask them for a comment if you're not sure there will be any dissenters at the event, so you can get a quote of criticism to balance things out.

 

[Xooiid]

Why use only "good" quotes? Did your boss actually tell you to only use the quotes in favour of Rumsfeld and make people warm up to the event? Maybe you could get a friend who sees eye-to-eye on the issue to be there so you could ask them for a comment if you're not sure there will be any dissenters at the event, so you can get a quote of criticism to balance things out.

Maybe I should have phrased that a bit differently. A 'good' quote for me is the one that doesn't have too many stutters, is coherent and fits the messages that our unit wishes to put out there. I've used quotes with negative connotations before, yet they were still 'good' quotes because they flowed well with the stories.

Of course, objectivity is going to be vital, as it must always be. The loss of objectivity is one of the largest causes of the current state of journalism, or it's downward spiral into sensationalism and pandering, that plagues most civilian news outlets.

Thank you all for the support. It really does mean a lot to me.

 

[Daveman]

Well surely there's a way you could include some of the bad things in your write up, like "Rumsfeld is primarily known for the controversial invasion of Iraq that went ahead under what many feel to be dishonest pretences".

 

[loc978]

This is why I was always kept far, far away from Stars and Stripes writers. I may not have had the sheer stones to let go of my military bearing around the likes of Rumsfeld, but I'd sure as hell make one of those "a soldier who wished to remain anonymous" statements.

 

[J_Monsterface]

oops i accidentally must have clicked on the post about why selling out is ok

 

[Kae]

Well you will probably run with this sort of problem every once in a while as a journalist so remember to keep you're cool and do you're job well and if you need to vent, there's always the Internet but remember to use and account that does not reveal you're true identity, you don't want people thinking you are unprofessional.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

No, sorry but you all got it wrong...

You're going to have the best time of your life writing that article, you're going to be witty and sarcastic and totally against the standards and regime and stuff. You just going to show them some provocative journalizms[*sic]

You will just have to pawn Rumsfeld just because.

What?
You seriously think you can stop the machines from taking over by pleasing everyone and going against your ideals?

Let me rephrase that:

You think the Enclave will go easy on you just because you're trying to do your job well? They made the vaulty Vaults in the first place and they will kill you for sports. Besides the Brotherhood wussies need your help and now you could at least give them moral support by writing a true article that will set the world of fire.

click there 5 secs earlier in order to fit context​

Simply put, it's just as your military advisors from Civ 2 said:
"Where I come from, we don't fraternize with the enemy - how about yourself?"

In any case you have my deepest sympathizes and If something goes wrong our you can't live with your betrayed moral code you are invited to send me messages to receive parental scolding and free hugs!

 

[Jozxyqk]

I more or less find myself in the same boat. I'm thinking what I'm going to do career-wise after completing my degree majoring in Pharmacology. In the last year I've only started to awaken to the unethical drug-testing most of the big Pharmaceutical companies perform on 3rd world patients, often with dangerous and lethal results. And there's the 90/10 rule: 90% of drug funding and research focuses on problems (such as obesity and blood pressure) that only affect 10% of the world's population.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Now, I am going to do the story, and I will make it the best story I possibly can. I will report on the facts, use the good quotes, and give everyone a good feeling about the event. But it doesn't make me comfy. I just wanted to vent a little about how I felt on the situation.

Then don't write about your personal feelings. Instead, ask some people what they feel, what they think and write it (anonymously) down. "...despite all of this, some of people weren't that happy and that's because of..." and such...

 

[Torrasque]

Always remain objective.

Pretty much this.
Do your job, and if you really want to, talk to him about what it is you don't like about him, but take into account that you don't know him at all.
Most people on the internet forget the fact that they don't know someone until they actually sit down and talk to them.
Sure he may be a douchebag, not know as much as he should, and be a bad human being, but until you actually sit down and talk to him, you can't actually know anything about the guy.
I'm not saying you should ignore everything you've heard about him, but you should only base your opinion of others, on your own personal experiences.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Journalism shouldn't be just a "job". It has a whole lot of ethic-related elements attached to it. If you're doing that job, you're the mouth-peace of reality and you need to be as impartial as possible. Of course, with fox news and what have you this is often forgotten but we can still strive for improvement.

 

[Craorach]

You should be objective and impersonal, give the views of the people who are there, you have no right to have opinion's or emotions about doing a job you are paid to do.

 

[Nemu]

Do wot my gf did the years she was at West Point and in the Army: suck it up and do your job.

She hated the fact that she had to refer to me as a "he" in conversation, but she needed to do her job and coming out would have risked it.


I'm quite positive that you'd not be the first person to interview someone you opposed (in this case politically/morally).

 

[Xooiid]

Do wot my gf did the years she was at West Point and in the Army: suck it up and do your job.

She hated the fact that she had to refer to me as a "he" in conversation, but she needed to do her job and coming out would have risked it.

I'm quite positive that you'd not be the first person to interview someone you opposed (in this case politically/morally).

I think you missed the gist of my rant: I AM going to do my job. And I'll do it well.

I came here because I thought (correctly) that some Escapists had ran into similar questions in their time and could help bear the venting. It beats venting to a blank wall, and I don't want to burden the Soldiers in my shop with something like this, because it wouldn't do them or me any good and it would distract from the mission at hand.

Also, I found that telling a Soldier to 'suck it up' is a quick way to ignore an issue. Yes, sometimes it needs to be said, but a leader should weigh the situation before deciding that is the case. I'm sorry for what you and your girlfriend had to go through, though.

Finally, I know I'm not the first, and I know I won't be the last. But venting out my conundrum helped me with the issue, and it doesn't seem as bad now.

----------

Ioc978: I'm not an S&S writer, though I did get an offer for a posting there. Most of the S&S staff are civilians, while I'm still a uniformed 46Q. Some of our stuff does get published in the Stripes, but it's mostly from their civilian/contract employees.

----------

J Monsterface: Not really 'selling out', since it's more of a 'mission' than a cash grab. Selling out would be 'Hey, write this article for me and I'll make sure you get a bonus', which would probably end in an assault charge. To me, it was more being stuck between my duty to the shop and my personal feelings on the story focus. Then again, make of that what you will.

-----------

Siding with the Enemy: I have no idea what you're describing, citizen. Eyebot #071118 has recorded this conversation for quality assurance purposes. Move along.

-----------

DaveMan, JesterRaiin: Though it is quite possible that can happen, I just can't add that into a story. It would have to be something that happened with the event itself, and with the fact that he is coming here for what is a relatively small American audience does give the impression that it's more of a troop visit than a profit stop. Otherwise he'd do what Palin did and make his book signings exclusively in Red States to ensure friendly crowds and high sales.

------------

Torrasque: My qualms were more with his policy than the man himself, but I do see your point. It'll be interesting to talk with him, that is for certain, and my viewpoint may change. What will be, will be, I suppose.

------------

Everyone: This thread got a lot more support than I thought it would, and it really does help me out to know that there are people who, while maybe not concerned, will still show support. Thanks, it really does mean a lot to me.