Ethics in Business Communications

In week two, my learning team and I considered the apology from 60 Minutes, due to the Benghazi report that they aired in 2013. The report talked about how 6 Minutes published a story about the attack in Benghazi, Libya. The report was based solely on the word of one individual name Dylan Davies. Later it was found that Dylan Davies had reported to a particular government agency that his were about at the time of the incident was not right to the information that he provided 60 Minutes. His original statement to 60 Minutes was entirely false.

As a group, we have discussed many aspects to this story one being was this an immoral act or was it just bad judgment on the journalist and the company? During the discussion, it was felt that it was unethical of 60 Minutes to report a story without having all the proper evidence to back it up. Other believe that it was not an unethical issue, but bad judgment call of the journalist and company for not taking all the necessary steps involved reporting the story in an accurate way.

There was also discussion about maybe the federal government may have showed some signs of unethical practice due to each agency seemly kept information from the other. While discussing this topic points were made on how this story makes the media industry look bad as a whole. It shows a lack of courtesy of people's time by not doing a full or complete investigation or verifying the evidence.

When looking at the whole situation concerns are flared due to some viewers felt that 60 Minutes did this as a stunt to get higher ratings. Others feel that they rushed into the story so that their company could be the first one to report on such a catastrophic problem involving the world.