Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
“60 Minutes” and the Benghazi Scandal Trap By Amy Davidson Sorkin -…
“60 Minutes” and the Benghazi Scandal Trap
By Amy Davidson Sorkin
What ethical issues were raised by the article?
Relying on an uncorroborated source
Relying on a source that has a business relationship with CBS
Reporting false information
Defending the unreliable source after his testimony was called into question
Your reaction to the ethical issues raised by the information in the article?
Why would they rely on a story that doesn't even sound believable?
This seems like a story that was rushed to air despite the claims that it took a long time to complete
Why weren’t the reporters aware of the impending FBI report?
Play devil's advocate, what opposing view could be expressed?
The FBI could be unreliable source of information
The reporters were trying to piece the story together with the best sources they had available
We may have unrealistic standards for highly competitive news media
What is your opinion about the issue, and what caused you to form that opinion?
I think the fact that they claimed to spend a year on the story makes it all the more embarrassing that Davies's story made it to air
Davies's story sounds very vague and comes off like a someone who reads Tom Clancy novels. The detail about hitting someone with the butt of his gun is irrelevant to the story.
How could using a balance in research and reporting tactics have made a difference in the outcome of what was reported?
If that had one more source who could corroborate Davies story or at least have a similar perspective
Pinpointing objective facts about the story rather than relying on the drama for emotional appeal