---

People think journalism ethics are about the big, dramatic moments — whether to publish leaked documents, how to handle conflicts of interest, when to protect a source.

Those moments matter. But the majority of ethical decision-making happens in small, unglamorous choices that no one outside the newsroom ever sees.

It’s the photo you don’t use because it’s technically accurate but emotionally manipulative. It’s the quote you cut because it’s true but misleading without context. It’s the headline you rewrite because the first version was sensational instead of informative.

These decisions don’t make headlines. They don’t win awards. But they’re the foundation of trust.

Choosing Context Over Sensation

At KRON 4 News and ABC 10News, I faced these calls constantly — not because we faced constant ethical crises, but because every editorial decision carries ethical weight.

During coverage of protests and civil unrest, we had access to dramatic footage that could attract attention. We opted not to use certain clips because they highlighted violence rather than the demonstrators’ message. This was an editorial decision aimed at informing the public responsibly, not sensationalizing events.

In covering officer-involved shootings, we carefully weighed how much detail to publish about victims, suspects and officers. Too little information undermines transparency; too much can sensationalize tragedy or violate privacy. Our editorial decisions were guided by relevance and public understanding, not spectacle.

When covering elections, we faced pressure to call races early for competitive advantage. We held back until we were certain because getting it right mattered more than being first.

None of those decisions were controversial. None required corporate legal review. None made us heroes.

But over time, they built credibility. Audiences learned they could trust us to prioritize accuracy over speed, context over sensation and public service over performance metrics.

Ethics Inside Institutional Communications

At SDSU, I faced a different set of ethical considerations. NewsCenter operates within a university communications structure, which means we’re not purely independent journalists — we serve institutional goals.

That relationship requires constant ethical calibration.

• When do we cover campus controversies the way a newsroom would?
• When do we frame stories to support the university’s mission?
• How do we balance transparency with strategic communications?

There’s no rulebook for this. It requires judgment, case by case.

Whether navigating communications around a campus protest or incident, our Strategic Communications team focused on documenting what was happening — prioritizing verified facts, clear timelines and public understanding. When the university achieved a major research breakthrough, we told that story with clarity and pride, understanding that our role includes explaining and amplifying institutional work, while still maintaining credibility through accuracy and transparency.

The line isn’t always clear. But being transparent is part of maintaining credibility.

A Practical Framework for Daily Ethical Decisions

Here’s how I approach ethical decision-making in daily editorial work:

Ask who benefits from this choice. If the primary beneficiary is your organization’s traffic numbers rather than audience understanding, reconsider. Ethical journalism prioritizes service over metrics.

Consider what you’re emphasizing versus what you’re omitting. Every editorial choice is a framing choice. You can tell a true story in ways that mislead by emphasizing certain facts and downplaying others. Ask whether your framing serves clarity or agenda.

Evaluate whether you’re explaining or exploiting. Dramatic content isn’t inherently unethical — sometimes reality is dramatic. But there’s a difference between showing something because it’s necessary for understanding and showing it because it will drive engagement. Know the difference.

Test your decisions against long-term credibility, not short-term performance. Will this choice build trust over time, or will it erode it? Ethical journalism plays the long game.

Be transparent about conflicts and limitations. If you have institutional ties, acknowledge them. If you lack certain information, say so. Transparency doesn’t eliminate ethical complexity, but it signals that you’re navigating it in good faith.

The best journalism I’ve done wasn’t flashy. It was the steady accumulation of sound editorial judgment — day after day, story after story, decision after decision.

Ethics aren’t just about what you do in crisis. They’re about what you do when no one’s watching and the consequences feel small.

Those small choices add up. And over time, they define whether people trust you.

Key Takeaway: Ethical journalism is built on daily editorial decisions that prioritize accuracy, context and public service over engagement metrics — even when no one is watching.