I've attached the paper requirements and also an example of a paper that received an A. Please follow the requirements carefully and refer to the example of A grade paper to see how to format things correctly.
DUE APRIL 5th, at 10:30PM (CT)
Thanks
Microsoft Word - Document2 Write no more than a 10-page paper (including the bibliography) that uses the 10-point SEA to write an analysis of a mass media case study. For each Part, use Word. Do not include a cover sheet or running heads. The media case study for this paper will be: Fyre Festival. In 2017, the organizers promoted a music festival that didn’t exist. Title, abstract, and introduction: Write a title of not more than 10 words that is factual and interesting. Your abstract is a summation of your topic in not more than 75 words and single- spaced. Write an introduction that will catch the interest and the imagination. Include a quote. The rest of the introduction should simply tell the reader what to expect in your paper including the use of the 10-step SEA. (10- Step SEA is stated below) For this paper, you will use the 10-point SEA to write your analysis of a mass media case study. Label each section with a bold heading. You must use itemized lists as much as possible. Use APA style for all your sources. Also, in a separate attachment is an example of a paper that received an A. Please use that example on how to format the paper The Ten-Step Systematic Ethical Analysis (SEA) 1. What are the three most significant facts of the case? After a careful evaluation of all the known facts presented within a particular scenario, single out the top three facts that are the most important? Clearly state why each fact is important. 2. What are three facts you would like to know about the case? You should have questions about the case study that are not answered by the facts presented. You may need to interview individuals, consult written records, explore the web, and so on to obtain a clearer idea of the facts and motivations of the actors involved with the case. Use sources to answer your questions and cite them using APA style. 3. What is the ethical dilemma related to the case? Most dilemmas come down to a conflict of interests between the various parties involved, but there may also be economic, privacy, and personal issues that motivate the dilemma. Define the dilemma and cite your source. 4. Who are the moral agents and what are each person’s specific role- related responsibilities (RRRs)? Concentrate on media personnel as MAs. 5. Who are the stakeholders and what are each person’s specific role- related responsibilities (RRRs)? Name no more than three SHs. 6. What are the possible positive and negative values of all the moral agents and stakeholders named in Steps 4 and 5 and the two most opposite values from all the lists? State 4-5 values for each MA and SH. 7. What are the loyalties of the moral agents and stakeholders named in Steps 4 and 5 and the two most opposite loyalties from all the lists? State 4-5 possible loyalties for each MA and SH. 8. For each of the six moral philosophies used in this book describe either a justification or a criticism that can be applied to a moral agent or a stakeholder named in Steps 4 and 5 in the case study. The six philosophies are: golden rule, hedonism, golden mean, categorical imperative, utilitarianism, and the veil of ignorance. Define each philosophy and include your source. 9. What creative and/or credible alternatives could resolve the issue? You need to name two creative and two credible alternatives. 10. What would you do as a member of the media? As advocated by Sissela Bok in her three-step SEA, this final step asks you to make known your personal reaction to the case study being analyzed. Pretend you are a specific media professional involved with the case. What action would you take and why? Your Name Here Covington Caught in the Crossfire: Amateur Videographers Dictating News Media Abstract The national news media were sent into a frenzy when Covington Catholic high school students were seen in a cellphone video seemingly taunting a Native American man at the footsteps of the Lincoln Memorial. Soon after, another video surfaced and showed a different perspective, providing insight on how the events unfolded. This paper will use a 10-step systematic ethical analysis to examine the event and media landscape which allowed for the resulting confusion and vitriol. “I can only speak for myself and what I observed and felt at the time. But I would caution everyone passing judgement based on a few seconds of video to watch the longer video clips that are on the internet, as they show a much different story than is being portrayed by people with agendas” (Sandmann, 2019). In January 2019, Nick Sandmann and other classmates from Covington Catholic High, along with an elderly Native American man and black Hebrew Israelites confronted each other at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Multiple amateur videographers captured the confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial on their cellphones. These videos were then shared with news media at different times, resulting in media narratives that showed different perspectives with different sides to the story. Because of this staggered release of videos, the national new media were in a state of chaos, causing confusion for their national audiences. To understand and further examine the events of that day, the 10-step systematic ethical analysis, developed by Paul Martin Lester (2018), will be utilized to understand the motivations, loyalties, and moral philosophies guiding and justifying the actions of all entities involved in the January 2019 confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial. Step 1: Three Significant Facts 1. It is important to note that all three groups that were involved in the incident were there for political purposes. This is important because no group is free of blame in this scenario- there are no true victims. The high school boys from Covington Catholic High were in Washington D.C. for the March for Life anti-abortion demonstration. Among the group of boys, many can be seen wearing hats and clothing Make America Great Again lettering. The Native American activists were present because of the Indigenous People’s March, pushing for recognition of issues facing Indigenous people. The Black Hebrew Israelites were demonstrating and proclaiming their religious beliefs, including that America would be destroyed in nuclear warfare (Kestenbaum, 2019). This is important because it emphasizes that none of the involved parties were non-political or innocent by default. They all had motives. 2. Among the multiple cellphone videos that were taken during the event, two primary clips arose, which Chappell uses in his piece. One of those clips was filmed by a member of the Black Hebrew Israelites, the other filmed by someone seemingly belonging to the group of Native American activists (Chappell, 2019). Because these were the primary videos to surface, the audiences of the news media were only given perspective on two of the three involved parties, potentially introducing bias by not highlighting the point of view of the Covington Catholic High students. This is important because it explains the bias in the early reporting of the incident and demonstrates that the journalists and their publications were more concerned about quickly delivering content versus determining accuracy. 3. According to Sandmann, the Covington Catholic boys were granted permission by their chaperone to engage in the confrontation by shouting their school chants (Sandmann, 2019). This is important because it demonstrates that the boys acted out of their own volition and were directly allowed to participate in this behavior by their authority figure; they were participants, not victims. Although meant with seemingly good intention, the boys and their adult chaperone willingly engaged in an already tense situation, potentially worsening the overall confrontation. It is important that it is understood that the boys received permission from their chaperone, which dismisses the idea that the boys are wholly innocent. Step 2: Facts to Know 1. What caused the incident to go viral and cause such a national news media takeover? According to the New York Times, the initial video of the incident was posted on Twitter by an account by the name of @2020fight. The video was posted with the caption, “This MAGA loser gleefully bothering a Native American protestor at the Indigenous Peoples March” (Conger & Frenkel, 2019). Conger and Fenkel report that the account was part of a network that was built to make content go viral, posting more than a hundred political tweets a day. According to communication scholar, Jason Turcotte, “[news] recommendations from friends who are perceived as strong opinion leaders are associated with an increase on respondents’ desire to engage in additional information- seeking behaviors (Turcotte, 2015). Given that the @2020fight account was an opinion leader based on its network of 30,000 followers, this allowed more trust to be placed in the information that the account posted, allowing the content to have more potential to go viral. 2. How often does the news media source it’s information from social media? According to a content analysis of UK and Dutch newspapers by Marcel Broersma and Todd Graham, “tweets can trigger news stories because they are newsworthy themselves. This was the case in about 20 per cent of the stories in which tweets were quoted” in the news stories that they analyzed (Broersma & Graham, 2013). Although the research is conducted in Europe, and the situation at hand is American, there can be estimation and extrapolation of the data. More than anything, the data can be used as a point of reference as to how much social media influences the reporting of news media. 3. What was Nathan Phillip’s intention in putting himself in the middle of the confrontation and facing off with Nick Sandmann? In an audio interview with NPR, Nathan Phillips argued that he feared for the safety of the Black Hebrew Israelites because of the large group of young White men. He argued that because of recent news media, he was not comfortable with the dynamic of a large group of white men confronting a small group of black men (Chappell, 2019). Phillips was attempting to calm tensions instead of contributing to them. Step 3: The Ethical Dilemma The ethical dilemma to this event is stereotyping. On the Simply Psychology website, Saul McLeod (2017) defines the term as, “In social psychology, a stereotype is a fixed, over generalized belief about a particular group or class of people. By stereotyping we infer that a person has a whole range of characteristics and abilities that we assume all members of that group have. For example, a ‘hells angel’ biker dresses in leather.” Given that the initial reporting of the event involved only a short clip of the incident as well as claims of political statements, the public divided politically on this event. As a result, stereotypes were formed on both sides of the political spectrum based on the contents of the early video. Because speed is prioritized by journalists over wholistic and accurate reporting, early news reports can disseminate biased information, contributing to polarization in society and the erosion of American democracy. Step 4: Moral Agents and Role Related Responsibilities Journalists. • They report on current events, communicate newsworthy information accurately and effectively, • remain fair and unbiased in their reporting of information, • do not cause unnecessary harm to the subjects of their reporting, and • convey information in a timely manner. Amateur videographers. For amateur videographers, “their purpose is to give voice to new and discernible points of view” (Bock, 2011). They are to record events as they occur, provide perspective that otherwise might not be obtainable, be accurate in their recording of events, capture an event in its entirety if possible, to not intrude or interfere with events as they occur, and to pass along the video/information when possible. Step 5: Stakeholders and their Role Related Responsibilities The Covington Catholic High students. • They are to be respectful of others, • defend themselves in a way that does not escalate tensions, • to remove themselves from potentially dangerous situations, • to be mindful of how their actions affect others, and • to not mock or offend others. Nathan Phillips. • To not place himself in the middle of a confrontation, • to not perform an action with no context and expect it to be well received, • to remove himself from a potentially dangerous situation, and • to be mindful of how his actions affect others. The audiences of the news media. • They are to be responsible with their media consumption habits, • assess the information they