The SPJ Code of Ethics acts as a guideline for Journalists everywhere, mainstream or independent. With the rise of social media and “reporter” identities, it is common for people to question the validity of independent journalists. They measure a Journalists validity by their salary. A “professional” journalist gets a regular salary and does journalism as a career. The “independent” journalist does not receive a salary and a lot of the times has not received a traditional journalism education. But how can we measure a journalists worth by his or her salary? In fact, shouldn’t we question a journalists validity more, when they make a salary? More importantly we should measure a journalists validity based on his or her ability to follow the SPJ code of ethics.

If a Journalist’s practice is completely ethical than “validity” should be already granted. The SPJ code of Ethics is essentially its name: it is a code which lays out ethical rules every journalist should abide by. There are four main clauses: seek truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently, and be accountable and transparent. Within these there are bullet points that explain each concept further, providing examples and ethical dilemmas. For example, underneath “Seek Truth and Report it,” one bullet point reads, “Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Of course, undercover work is important in the field of journalism. It is sometimes the only way to unveil an injustice that is being hidden from the public. Because the public has the right to know, journalists must take measures to unveil what is not being said. But this should always be done ethically.

When the clause refers to “surreptitious methods,” I automatically think of leading questions. A leading question is a question that already anticipates it’s answer. A simple example is asking: Why do you think that person is so horrible? Instead of just asking: What do you think about that person?

Now, for a more serious and political example, there is a video taken by a Citizen journalist saying that Vanity Fair writer Todd Purdum is  “sleazy,” “slimy,” and a “scumbag.” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/bill-clinton-purdhum-a-sl_b_104771.html) But he said this only because he trusted the person asking the question. Little did he know, the citizen journalist had wanted this kind of answer. Instead of asking: What did you think about the article? Or Do you have anything to say about the article? The journalist instead deceived Bill Clinton making him think she was on her side. She got a good story but the way she did this was unethical. A good journalist should still be able to get a good story by covering an event ethically.