Issue date: 11/15/07 Section: Editorial/Opinion

When I first grabbed a copy of The Riverfront Review, I figured it would be a conservative version of The Flip Side, but with a stronger emphasis on political debates on contemporary, national and world issues. I was enjoying the concept because I do get sick of reading the same viewpoint over and over from different people.

What I didn't know, however, was that by its second issue, The Review would tear apart any standards of journalism ethics it claimed to protect and uphold. As a journalist - not as any sort of official voice for The Spectator - that is the biggest problem I see with the Review. Forget about the paper's politics for a second, regardless of what you believe or which side of the political spectrum you lean toward. It doesn't matter if you're liberal or conservative - a breach in ethics is wrong no matter what side of the fence you're on. Journalism major or not, a lot of the mistakes should be common sense to the average person.

When deciding to make a newspaper or entering the mass media marketplace of ideas, a group should have a clear definition of its purpose, some sort of standard operating procedure to establish credibility and a way to convey a message in a manner that will keep people interested in what that group has to say. Unfortunately, I saw none of these things when paging through The Review and it could affect how people view the overall credibility of other campus media outlets.

People will see the damage The Review has done to journalism ethics and may think that's how all newspapers operate, which is about as far from the truth as you can get.

First off, taking news articles from another newspaper or news network without permission and putting it in another publication is universally illegal, even if you re-word some of the article and keep the original quotes. Not only is it illegal, but it's plagiarism and is incredibly unethical. And even then, the Review shouldn't have used Fox News if it's claiming to hold itself to a high standard of journalism ethics. Of all the news networks, the Review chose the one that touts itself as a conservative source of media. Suffice to say that doesn't really help their objective cause.

The only reason The Spectator uses news wire stories is because it pays for the rights to use the articles and pictures along with them. Even though it's limited in its access to certain stories and newspapers, The Spectator cannot just go to the Washington Post's Web site and re-print one of its articles not found on the wire service because it's unethical and The Spectator doesn't have the money for a lawsuit. In the future, if the Review still strives to become a credible news source while wishing to re-print a wire story, it should find a way to legally to publish that article.

Continued...

Page 1 of 3 next >

Article Tools