Between facts and norms: Journalism and global ethics.

• Author: Kim, Yoonhye

This paper examines public discourse and how it is impacted by the media, suggesting an ultimate ethical criterion for journalism. First, it is impossible to clearly separate the facts from the norms because journalists'factual descriptions are inextricably linked with audiences' normative interpretations. In this sense, every word has a normative connotation. Second, there is no guarantee that a certain social norm is always ethically correct. In the past, social norms used to reflect not only virtuous but also vicious ideas such as imperialism, colonialism, slavery, racism, and sexism. Third, a minimum ethical consensus should be made based on cosmopolitanism, which can be set as an ultimate and final form of ethics. Journalism should be open to alternative interpretations based on cosmopolitanism, instead of simply reflecting and reproducing existing social norms.

Yoonhye Kim is a graduate student at Sciences Po and Columbia SIPA. People's opinions are shaped by social discourse and it is well known that the media impacts the direction and content of public discourse. It therefore follows that people's beliefs can be formed and strengthened by the media's factual descriptions and normative accounts. Considering the possible impact of media, some might question the veracity and credibility of journalists' descriptions. For example, President Trump and his supporters accused the liberal media of being biased, claiming that it "is trying to take Donald Trump out." (1) Then, how can we measure media's objectivity and its moral criteria? Or better still, as one of the most important social institutions, what kind of roles and responsibilities does the media assume?

In this paper, I will discuss the importance of media and its impacts on public discourse, suggesting an ultimate ethical criterion for journalism. First, I claim that it is fundamentally impossible to separate the facts from the norms because journalists' descriptions are set to involve audiences' interpretations and perceptions. When journalists send their factual descriptions to their audience, the audience should interpret them. Since audience interpretation is always based on the prevailing public discourse and current social norms, the lines between the facts and the norms are blurred in the process of interpretation. In this sense, every word has a normative connotation. Second, I claim that there is no guarantee that a certain social norm is always ethical. The fact that a majority of people in a society take certain norms for granted does not mean that the norm is morally correct. Public discourse and social norms have always been shaped by specific historical contexts and throughout time they have reflected not only virtuous but also vicious ideas such as imperialism, colonialism, slavery, racism, and sexism. Third, I claim that a minimum ethical consensus should be made based on cosmopolitanism, which can be set as an ultimate form of ethics. Only with cosmopolitanism can we evaluate various words and deeds that have been formed by the normative discourse in an ethical way. According to cosmopolitan views, our fundamental moral claims will derive from our status as human beings, and each individual will be considered as a single moral community over any other group. From this moral standpoint, which centers on the fundamental needs and interests of individual human beings and of all human beings, realism in the discipline of international relations is not defensible because it encourages the violation of this moral principle. (2) Using all three arguments, I will make a critical claim about the political perspectives that have not considered individuals as a basic unit of their analysis and argue that journalism should be open to alternative understandings based on cosmopolitanism, instead of simply reflecting and reproducing the existing social norms.

While elaborating on each of these points, I will introduce four news articles. The first article, written in 1921, will demonstrate that journalists' descriptions always connote the social discourse of the time and the audience will also interpret them using those very social norms. The second and third ones, from 1906 and 1942 respectively, are racist accounts against Asians, showing that the social norms at a specific point in time do not always involve ethically correct notions. The final article, from 2016, deals with the issue of the South China Sea, adopting the perspective of state-centric realism, which has a moral problem.

RELATIONS BETWEEN FACTS AND NORMS

These repressive measures were vigorously enforced, finally culminating in the so-called massacre at Amritsar, where several natives were shot down by order of General Dyer and many more wounded. The Amritsar episode is described as "revolution" by certain authorities, and the British press have generally shown a disposition to commend General Dyer for the course taken. Possibly yielding to expediency, the Government censured General Dyer severely and recalled him. In the meantime, the Indian Nationalist movement appears to be growing rather than diminishing, and the activities of Gandhi and his successes in creating unrest are increasing. With Russian Bolshevik influence pressing from the north and with revolutionary activities working from within, the British authorities are confronted with a problem of tremendous difficulties. --"Gandhi, A Monk Who Imperils British Rule in India," Literary Digest, 1921 (3) This is an excerpt from an article in...