Decision-Making and Potter Box - Essay Example

            Chuck Lane's decision to fire Stephen Glass can be considered ethical and right. Lane has laid down the facts and evidence that Stephen Glass has been dishonest and fictional in writing his reports representing The New Republic. Glass' stories such as the hacking report of Jukt Micronics and the drunken antics of the Young Republicans were proven to be based on nothing but Glass' fictional stories.

            Going to the second quadrant of the box, Lane considered several values when deciding whether to fire Stephen Glass or not. Professionally speaking, journalist, are guided by the SPJ principles which basically states "to seek the truth and report it." It is therefore mandated that journalists "should be honest, fair, and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information" (SPJ Code of Ethics, 1996). SPJ principle ensured that journalists are bound by the code to tell the truth and become fair to the readers. In this case, Glass did nothing but invent stories made out of lies.

            The third quadrant of Potter Box stressed out the principles that will help the decision-maker which in this case is Chuck Lane to fully understand the situation. Following Kant's categorical imperative which states that " Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Kant's ideas include being ethical is being objective and what is right must be done whatever the situation is. Lane is being objective as he has the proof of the deeds of Stephen Glass. Thus whether Glass has been a good employee and friend to the workers of The New Republic, he deserves to be fired with valid reasons.

            The last box in the Potter Box contains the loyalties. In this case, Lane as the decision-maker should be loyal to the readers, the public. Firing Glass means ensuring that the people reading The New Republic get the information and reports they deserve to know, the truth.

Question 2:

            Both Angela of Catfish and Stephen Glass managed to deceive people and acted wrongly. However, choosing who is more evil between the two must not be subjective to be considered ethical. Angela in the movie entitled Catfish managed to create a different persona in the world of the social network. She made up different personalities such as Abby, Megan, Vince, and Abby's brother. Each has his and her own character who dealt with Nev separately. However, it all ends up to the truth that it was Angela making up stories to Nev. Although it is true that Megan and Vince existed and connected to Angela, they were not aware that they have been contacting with Nev nor have any personal connection to him. It was Angela who made up their Facebook accounts and controlled their character in the social world without them knowing this.

            Stephen Glass, on the other hand, made up stories published to the public. He is a reporter and associate editor of one of the reliable and respected magazines in Washington DC, The New Republic. It is his duty to give a reliable, fair, and honest report to the public. The public trusted the magazine to deliver the correct information. Thus, Stephen Glass acting and deceiving people to earn prestige and respect was unethical.

            Between the two villains, the "worst" villain is Stephen Glass. John Stuart Mill's principle of utility dictates that we must seek the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Therefore, one is a lesser evil if it affects a lesser number of people. Although both of them are proven to be unethical, according to Mill, ethical choice produces the greatest balance of good over evil, in this case, since Glass is affected more than Angela had, he is eviler and worse than her.