The Journalist And The Murderer: Summary

Final

Since the beginning of journalism there has been a controversial debate over ethics and the extent to which a journalist may go to obtain a story. According to W.E.B. Dubois, integrity, honesty, decency, and courage are four primary ethical principles every person should follow. Author Janet Malcolm dives deep into the ethics of journalism in her groundbreaking publication The Journalist and the Murderer. Malcolm analyzes the ethics of best-selling author Joe McGinniss during his time developing a story on Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald.

MacDonald had been accused of murdering his pregnant wife and two children on February 17th, 1970. Following an interview between Joe McGinniss and Jeffrey MacDonald, the two agreed for McGinniss to use MacDonald as the subject of a book, Fatal Vision. MacDonald intended for the book to prove his innocence. During the duration of MacDonald's trial, McGinniss would live with him and observe his every move. Given the weight of the situation, MacDonald’s lawyer had McGinniss sign a contract that stated he would not release any defense strategies and that he would portray MacDonald in a positive light. Throughout his stay, McGinniss deceived MacDonald into believing the two were close friends.

After MacDonald was found to be guilty, written messages between the two show McGinniss telling him that he believed he was innocent. Come time of the publication of Fatal Vision, it was clear that there was not a friendship at all and that McGinniss believed MacDonald was guilty.
McGinniss began to lie about his friendship with MacDonald because he needed a juicier story.

At some point during the trial, McGinniss realized that MacDonald was not the subject he needed to fit his narrative. MacDonald was a boring person with a personality that would suggest that he would not be able to commit such a crime. McGinniss manipulated MacDonald’s words to portray him as a sociopathic womanizer that deserved to be convicted. Shortly following the publication of the novel, MacDonald sued McGinniss for breach of contract and fraud. The case was settled outside of the courtroom in which MacDonald was given $325,000. To this day, McGinniss vehemently believes MacDonald is guilty. Conversely, MacDonald has consistently plead his

innocence.
Issues such as McGinniss and MacDonald’s frequently arise when it comes to journalist and source relationships. A journalist’s job is simply to seek the truth and report it. At times, it is difficult to tell when a source is providing credible information. False information may cause harm to the public. A journalist must minimize harm; however, if they do cause harm they must be accountable and transparent during their work. In this scenario, it is unclear whether MacDonald is telling the truth. The harm caused by Fatal Vision is undetermined, but it is quite palpable that McGinniss was not transparent with his source; therefore, he acted unethically in reporting this case.
Given that ethics is not determined in the field of law, rather by colleagues in the respective field, it is clear that journalist view McGinniss’ decision as unethical through Janet Malcolm’s dialogue. It was unethical for McGinniss to lie in this case because he did not exhaust all other options before turning to deception. If McGinniss did attempt all other options, then the public significance of the scenario needed to be determined prior to forgoeing transparency. MacDonald’s case was not one of public significance and deception should not have been used. If the situation were of high public significance, and all other options had been attempted, then it may have been acceptable for McGinniss to deceive MacDonald. An example of a case where all options were pursued and public significance was high would be the Pentagon Papers.
Except in scenarios such as the one mentioned above, journalists must be ethical due to the massive power they hold. Journalist uncover information that can be released to a large range of people. They have the ability to manipulate the way people view a certain issue. Additionally, they are able to serve as a watchdog on the government and alert the public when the government is acting corrupt. This power is appealing to sources, such as MacDonald. Sources want to use this power to gain publicity and swing public opinion in their favor. MacDonald believed that this novel would prove the world of his innocence and show that the justice system had failed.
Janet Malcolm sums up her opinion on the case when she states “Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible,” (Malcolm 3). Many others, including myself, agree with this statement in regards to Joe McGinniss. As hard as it may be at times, it is critical to remain transparent with a source. Once transparency is lost, credibility is lost as well. The debate is far from over and each circumstance will provide a different perspective on the issue; however, during every project, journalist need to keep in mind W.E.B. Dubois’ ethical principles: integrity, honesty, decency, and courage.