Volume 7, Issue 2004

Thinking Clearly: Cases in Journalistic Decision Making Rosenstiel, Tom and Mitchell, Amy S. (Eds.) New York: Columbia University Press, 2003 265 pages Cloth, 0-231-12588-7, US $54.50

Reviewed by: Stephen A. Banning, Louisiana State University
Printer-friendly PDF version

Can one separate journalism decision making from ethics? This book claims one not only can but should.

The Editor’s Note claims: “These case studies are not intended to be a manual of ethics…. [E]thics, to some extent, forces one to draw artificial distinctions; when taught separately, it can make the subject of professional responsibility seem subordinate or even superfluous.” This seems an odd statement considering that journalistic professionalism has historically been founded on codes of ethics. It also contradicts the introduction two pages later in which James Carey, listed as “academic advisor” suggests the reader study the cases in the framework of the “ethics of democracy.” In light of these contradictory statements, the reader is left wondering if the authors had a clear vision themselves. It is somewhat ironic that the title of the book is Thinking Clearly.

The editors propose that this book is the first of its kind. However, there are many books that focus on journalism ethics case studies. A few of these that are currently in print are listed at the end of this article. In a more general way, however, journalism case studies have been published since Frederick Hudson wrote the first journalism history text in1873.

If you expect to find many short pithy cases that journalists are likely to run into every day, you will be disappointed. Cases include such shopworn topics as McCarthyism and Watergate, although chapters are also devoted to the Columbine shooting and the Starr investigation of Bill Clinton.

The book reads like it was put together by a committee and, to some extent, it was. The nine chapters are written by nine different reporters. Therefore, while the cases are historical, it would appear none of the writers are trained academically as historians. While the chapter writers have experience as journalists, writing for the academic world requires a higher level of research and training. None of the writers has so much as a Master’s degree.

The good part is that while many of the chapters are more like history lessons, the wrap-up discussion questions, while few, do apply the material to present day situations. One does wonder, however, why the introduction spends so much time justifying Socratic dialogue while only supplying two to four questions at the end of the each of the chapters.

There is certainly room for new books on critical thinking and ethics. Unfortunately, neither the material nor style in Thinking Clearly is fresh. In the end one has to use one’s own “clear thinking” to assess whether the positive book’s aspects warrant assigning it to students.

Back to Top
Home | Current Issue | Archives | Editorial Information | Search | Interact