Intent to commit election fraud, or a radical way to expose a flawed government system? Regardless of how you want to politically classify James O’Keefe and Cam Higby, their actions have created a Machiavellian-like consequentialist idea for us in the news world — and these two are not the only ones facing this moral dilemma.
Do the ends justify the means?
For those unfamiliar, O’Keefe and Higby filmed themselves in full burqas, speaking with fake accents and misrepresenting their identities while interacting with election judges during Minnesota’s primary elections. Their efforts were meant to expose gaps in the state’s voting rules and laws.
It is extremely important to note in your reporting:
- No ballots were cast by O’Keefe or Higby during this “social experiment.”
- They did not sign any document saying they were who they said they were.
- The identities they used belonged to real North Star State voters, who had no knowledge that the pair were parading around exposing the flaw in the system.
The ethical question for us as journalists is this: Do the ends justify the means? Is it okay to expose a flawed system by actively participating in that system? This moral question stretches far beyond the “independent guerrilla journalism” we are seeing on social media and can be seen across legacy media. There is no better recent example than the latest story out of CBS.
CBS’ Ethical Problem
On Sunday, 60 Minutes aired an immigration story about a dad who was deported to Ghana because it was unsafe for him to return to his home country of Mali. According to a New York Post report, 60 Minutes knowingly left out the fact that this deportee lied on his immigration documents, which is the real reason he no longer resides in the United States.
CBS News is not alone in knowingly manipulating the facts. I’ve written countless pieces about how outlets leave out or selectively present facts to help support their point or appease the guy signing their paychecks. Even worse, some are so overworked that facts are accidentally “forgotten.” But again, the question is: Do these ends justify the means?
The Once Simple Answer is Getting More Complicated
If you asked any self-respecting shoe-leather journalist back in 1960 whether the ends justify the means, they would almost always say yes. This is because the means were the same across the board — find the facts, report the story. Today, what should be a simple idea (report the facts and find the story) has exploded into political narratives and clickbait gobbledygook.
In the case of CBS, no, the ends don’t justify the means. Knowingly misleading your audience to fulfill a narrative you want won’t work. It’s not journalism; it’s political activism — and that line is beginning to blur.
Turning to O’Keefe and Higby: I would classify them as political activists, but they are doing more journalism than CBS! With the laws that Minnesota has, I really don’t see a better way of exposing a flawed system than showing it firsthand.
Both sides of the political aisle are dirty, and if O’Keefe and Higby were to expose some bad Republicans or problems with voting in red states, I’d be all for calling them journalists. But quite frankly, I haven’t seen that from their work. Don’t get me wrong, this is good work and can be considered political journalism, but it’s not journalism in the form our founding fathers wanted.
A Solution to a Modern Moral Dilemma
America’s free press has several liberties that we all sometimes take for granted. But the question “Do the ends justify the means?” is missing one key factor: intent. Is your work intended to present proof of a problem? Is it offering a solution? Or are you just making noise?
It’s clear O’Keefe and Higby are hell-bent on exposing problems within the American system. Their ends justify the means. Meanwhile, with CBS, the intent is less clear. Were they purposefully misleading the audience? The New York Post says yes, they were.
The question we all need to be asking ourselves is simple: What is the intent behind my work? Am I exposing an issue within the system? Am I presenting all the facts, even if some are a hindrance to my point? Am I offering a solution to the problem I am exposing?
As a journalist, your answers to those questions should be yes. So do the ends justify the means? They can — if you have the right intent.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
