"60 Minutes" And The Benghazi Scandal Trap
Sorkin, Amy D.
November 12, 2013
Published: The New Yorker

What ethical issues were raised by the article?

click to edit

Your reaction to the ethical issues raised by the information in the article

Play devils advocate, what opposing view could be expressed

click to edit

What is your opinion about the issue, and what caused you to form that opinion

How could using a balance in research and reporting tactics have made a difference in the outcome of what was reported

click to edit

click to edit

  1. The ethical issues that were raised was that 60 minutes aired an interview without fact-checking the source and it resulted in airing a story that didn't align with the FBI investigation.
  1. 60 Minutes did not formally "correct" the story their aired, instead they removed it from their website.
  1. When 60 minutes announced that they made a mistake, they used the interviewer's real name when he originally interviewed with a pseudonym.
  1. A story with such political and legal implication should always be confirmed by authorities who are leading the investigation.
  1. My first reaction was how did they not get clearance from the FBI. I would think that a story with such legal implications would require some type of authorization from authorities.
  1. Using the interviewee's real name is low. It seems as if they are giving out his information as if they are blaming him for their false reporting.
  1. I can't believe a program as popular and well acclaimed as 60 minutes didn't do their part to ensure accuracy in their program.
  1. Why didn't they announce an actual correction instead of deleting the story from their website. As a news source you are as good as your credibility and a false report affects that a lot.
  1. Maybe 60 minutes viewed the FBI report as false and were trying to break the "real" story
  1. 60 minutes shouldn't have to issue an apology for something they didn't report. The interviewee was the one who made the false claim, they should be held for purgery.
  1. FBI Investigations miss things all the time, this could be another side of the story that the FBI failed to cover, choose to look the other way, or chose to alter to fit their storyline.
  1. I thought 60 minutes was really low for not offering a correction. Removing it from their site doesn't fix the wrong, it looks the other way as if nothing happened.
  1. I thought airing the interviewee's real name was such sleezy journalism. It's as if they are pointing the finger at the interviewee for giving fake answers.
  1. 60 minutes is too reputable to have such poor reporting. Perhaps there is a conspiracy behind the true events that occurred.

click to edit

  1. Checking with multiple sources to ensure accuracy.
  1. Make interviewee sign a waiver making him responsible for everything they say during the interview.
  1. Check the story with the FBI. They are the ones handing the legal investigation, if there is a disconnection, let the FBI investigate and wait until the truth is discovered.