Download PDF - International Center for Journalists

Case Studies: Accuracy and Fairness
More than two years later, it remains a
hot topic among political forces and
journalists. Journalists debate the
ethics of the methods used to get the
story. But the government has
launched major investigations and
lawsuits involving every aspect of
Tehelka.com, its practices and its
investors. The portal’s funding has
dried up. Its offices are closed.
Financial supporters have been jailed.
Only a few staffers remain, and they
are not paid regularly.
Tarun J. Teipal, Tehelka’s Chief
Executive Officer, defends Operation
West End as “the ultimate indictment
Questions for Discussion
1. Was it ethically acceptable for
Tehelka reporters to pose as arms
dealers to uncover corruption in
the Indian military?
2. Was it ethically acceptable for
them to pay bribes? To procure
prostitutes? Is there a limit to how
far reporters can go in breaking
the law in order to get a story?
3. Are the reporters in this case guilty
of “entrapment”? In other words,
did they entice the military officials
into accepting bribes when they
might never have done so without
a journalist tempting them? Is
there an ethical difference
between uncovering corruption by
showing that officials will accept
“fake bribes” offered by journalists
and uncovering corruption by
showing officials accepting real
bribes?
4. Was there a way that the Tehelka
journalists could have gotten their
story without misrepresenting
themselves or breaking the law?
5. Should the government have
prosecuted Tehelka for breaking
the law in this case?
6. Some journalistic ethics codes say
reporters should not deliberately lie
or misrepresent themselves in the
pursuit of a story. Debate this point
of view: How do such tactics affect
the media’s credibility? Are readers
and audiences less likely to believe
a story is true when journalists
have lied and broken laws to get it?
On the other hand, if reporters
aren’t allowed to use such tactics,
who loses? What kinds of stories
might never get told?
7. Those who support using
deception and deliberate breaking
of laws in pursuit of a story say that
“the end justifies the means.” In
this case, they say that the
journalists’ unpleasant tactics were
justified by the fact that the public
learned that a wide range of
military officials were willing to
accept bribes. Do you agree? If so,
does the end always justify the
means?
8. Was it acceptable for the
journalists to record the military
officials on hidden cameras? Is
there a limit to what journalists can
show on hidden cameras?
9. Are the standards in this case any
different because the medium was
the Internet? Are Internet stories
less believable because it is easier
to post stories on the web than it is
to publish them in a newspaper or
broadcast them on the radio or
television?
59