cmns2720 minor essay
Communication ethics are integral to the industry as a whole as well as each facet and profession within that industry. Not only do ethics provide us with a framework on which to model our values, morals and standpoints, codes ethics also maintain a high standard when it comes to the information disseminated to publics by communication professionals. Arnett, Arenson and Bell (Arnett et al from hereon in) published a 2006 article defining six categories of communication ethics. This essay will discuss and compare these definitions and draw a conclusion as to whether or not the Dialogic Turn can be seen as a postmodern answer to issues raised by communication professionals.
The initial communication ethics category discussed by Arnett et al is democratic communication ethics. The definition supplied correlates to the traditional political view of democracy. ‘‘Democratic Communication Ethics are based on a public ‘process’ ethic, an open airing of diverse opinions and control by majority vote’’ (Arnett, 1987, p. 46). A “‘public’ process for forging mass collaboration on ideas, customs, and rights’’ (Arnett, p. 48).
This article iterates the notion of informed choice and its importance in the use of communication in a democratic public. The ethical use of communication in a democracy holds great importance for a fair and just political landscape. Public debates, social responsibility and the balanced journalistic reporting as well as freedom of speech and opinion all are features of democratic communication ethics. Although other categories of communication ethics focus on what is fair and just as well as multiple figures engaging in the communicative process, democratic communication ethics focus on accurately and ethically reflecting ones own standpoint which is engaged with by a public/s in order to make an informed choice, however “democratic communication ethic enters a postmodern world of difference with a reminder to not discount the other or the other’s
The initial communication ethics category discussed by Arnett et al is democratic communication ethics. The definition supplied correlates to the traditional political view of democracy. ‘‘Democratic Communication Ethics are based on a public ‘process’ ethic, an open airing of diverse opinions and control by majority vote’’ (Arnett, 1987, p. 46). A “‘public’ process for forging mass collaboration on ideas, customs, and rights’’ (Arnett, p. 48).
This article iterates the notion of informed choice and its importance in the use of communication in a democratic public. The ethical use of communication in a democracy holds great importance for a fair and just political landscape. Public debates, social responsibility and the balanced journalistic reporting as well as freedom of speech and opinion all are features of democratic communication ethics. Although other categories of communication ethics focus on what is fair and just as well as multiple figures engaging in the communicative process, democratic communication ethics focus on accurately and ethically reflecting ones own standpoint which is engaged with by a public/s in order to make an informed choice, however “democratic communication ethic enters a postmodern world of difference with a reminder to not discount the other or the other’s
References: Arnett, R. C., Arneson, P. & Bell, L. M. (2006): Communication Ethics: The Dialogic Turn, Review of Communication, 6:1-2, 62-92 Arnett, R. C. (1987). The status of communication ethics scholarship in speech communication journals from 1915-1985. Central States Journal, 38, 4461. Hallstein, D. Lynn O Brien. (1999). A postmodern caring: Feminist standpoint theories, revisioned caring, and communication ethics. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 3256. Harding, S. G. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge?: Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Johnstone, C. L. (1981). Ethics, wisdom, and the mission of contemporary rhetoric: The realization of human being. Central States Speech Journal, 32, 177-188. Public Relations Institute of Australia (2010), Individual Code of Ethics. PRIA Website, http://www.pria.com.au/membercentre/members-code-of-ethics accessed 11/09/2013