Reporting on a civil war

Answer choices

1. A

   Opposite4% picked this

   It is ethical in general to report known facts but unethical to do so while omitting other known facts if the omitted facts would

   This rule seems to suggest that filing the report would be unethical. The omitted facts (the government is causing these refugees to starve by shutting off food shipments) substantially alter the impression someone would get by reading the report. The censored version doesn't give the clear impression that the government is responsible for the starvation, whereas an uncensored version would give that impression.

   4%
2. B

   Opposite2% picked this

   In a situation of conflict, it is ethical to report known facts and unethical to fail to report known facts that would tend to

   In the sense that the journalist's report will convey known facts, this rule says that it is ethical to report it. If the article fails to report facts that would tend to exonerate one party, then it would be unethical. The censored version of this article fails to report facts that would tend to incriminate one party (it fails to report the facts that would incriminate the government for their role in the starving refugee situation). Would those same facts tend to exonerate the rebels? Yes. The starvation is happening in a rebel-held area, so it would be natural to blame the rebels for the starving refugees. But if the article included the known facts that the government is blocking food shipments, then the reader would not blame (would exonerate) the rebels for the starving refugee situation. So according to this rule, it would be unethical to file the censored report.

   2%
3. C

   Opposite2% picked this

   In a situation of censorship, it is unethical to make any report if the government represented by the censor deletes from the

   According to this rule, it would be unethical to file the censored report. After all, the government DID delete material unfavorable to that government (it got rid of information explaining that the government was blocking food to the starving refugees).

   2%
4. D

   Correct68% picked this

   It is ethical in general to report known facts but unethical to make a report in a situation of censorship if relevant facts have

   Why this is right

   This is saying that in general, filing a report full of known facts is ethical, so that would justify the journalist's conclusion. However, there's an exception: If relevant facts have been deleted by a censor and the recipient of the report is not warned that censorship has taken place, then it's unethical. But that exception doesn't apply here, because the recipient is being warned that censorship has taken place, via the disclaimer "cleared by government censors".

   Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   68%
5. E

   More Constraining24% picked this

   Although it is ethical in general to report known facts, it is unethical to make a report from which a censor has deleted relevant

   Similar to (D), this is saying that in general reporting known facts is ethical, which supports the journalist's conclusion. But it also has an exception: If the censor has deleted relevant facts (which is certainly the case in this journalist's report), then ethical reporting requires both that the recipient is warned of censorship and that the surviving facts do not by themselves give off a misleading impression. Given that the journalist's report never blames the starvation on nature or on the rebels, the censored report is not giving off the misleading impression that either of those two things is to blame for the starvation. We might still say that the report gives off the impression that the rebels are to blame, since the starvation occurs in a rebel-held area. But either way. Even if we say that this rule would agree with the journalist and deem her censored report an ethical one, this answer loses to (D), because this answer attaches two requirements to censored reports whereas (D) only attached one. With (D), we can publish any known facts, even if the report has been censored, as long as we issue a warning that the report has been censored. With (E), we can publish known facts, even if the report has been censored, as long as we meet two conditions: we issue a warning that the report has been censored and the surviving facts in the report don't give off a misleading impression.

   24%