Truth about Dirty Tricks

Truth about Dirty Tricks August 7, 2015

I see lots of Christians concerned about truth and integrity. Marriage and truth. Integrity and marriage. Truth and same-sex marriage.

So why no demand for truth from the makers of the Planned Parenthood videos? Why does truth only apply to the other side?

Remember the videos that exposed the ACORN community activists from about five years ago that also relied on fibbing to those being filmed? In case you don’t, here’s what Michael Gerson said about the ethics of journalism and why even “citizen” journalists don’t have a license to lie:

There is no ethical canon or tradition that would excuse such deception on the part of a professional journalist. Robert Steele of the Poynter Institute argues that undercover journalism can only be justified on matters of “profound importance” when “all other alternatives for obtaining the same information have been exhausted.” This may excuse posing as a worker at an unsanitary meat-packing plant or as a mental patient in an abusive asylum. But it is hardly a matter of life and death to expose the conventional liberalism of a radio executive.

O’Keefe’s defenders contend that he is not really a journalist but a new breed of “citizen journalist.” This can be defined as someone who simultaneously demands journalistic respect and release from journalistic standards, including a commitment to honesty. The profession of journalism counts many biases, challenges and failures. But citizen journalism has a problem of its own. Do we really want private citizens deceiving, taping and exposing the foolish weaknesses of their neighbors, with none of the constraints imposed by responsible professional oversight? Modern technology makes such things possible. Human nature makes them enjoyable. Neither makes them ethical.

These tactics are not a new brand of gonzo journalism. They are a sophisticated version of the political dirty trick. Would it be citizen journalism to fool a senator’s psychiatrist into revealing demeaning information about his or her patient? Or to befriend a prominent conservative pastor, goad him into making homophobic statements, then edit, exaggerate and put them on the Internet? What ethical or professional standard among citizen journalists — in many instances, really political activists — would rule out such deceptions?

The ethics of lying, of course, are complex. The prohibition against bearing false witness made the Ten Commandments cut. But I suspect that Moses would allow for lying to hide a Jew hunted by the Nazis. This does not make the prohibition against lying minor or relative. It is a recognition that competing moral duties can be more urgent and compelling — in this case, the moral duty to save a life. A spy tells lies to protect his country. A general engages in deception to defeat an enemy.

But there can be no moral duty to deceive in order to entrap a political opponent with a hidden camera.

If we’re going to be the people who defend “traditional” morality, is it okay to overlook it in order to defend it? If that question doesn’t make sense, that’s the point.

Image.


Browse Our Archives