Sex appeal catches readers offguard

Well, it really is true that sex sells. Is it ethical to have a sexual image on the front page of a newspaper? This was a dramatic change for the Sunday Northwest Life and left loyal readers skeptical of whether or not their paper was actually carrying news and not porn.

If I was a parent, I know I would be greatly concerned about this front page content. What if your children saw this?

"Now, I read my newspaper privately and I keep a pair of scissors handy. I don't believe in censoring the news. But I do not want to expose my kids to the filth," wrote a male reader.

It's very questionable if the media made a good decision with the placement of the sexual image. Many would not have been as upset or disturbed if the content was placed on the inside pages versus the front page.

However, the local news editor, Joan Deutsch, viewed this story as news that readers would want to know about. Her decision comes from the utility system since she thought it would bring about a common greater good and most people would be okay with the story.

A promise breaks more than trust

Anyone who has been keeping up with the news about the current Iraq situation is either not suprised it happened or is completely devastated. Bush recently announced the extension of up to 125 days for the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry.

I experienced just how heart-crushing this news was first-hand. My roommate, Rana, has a fiancee who is a member of the group that was extended. The couple had a set marriage date for June 30, 2007. Obviously with this extension he will miss their wedding date. Unfortunately, this is not the worst part. This experience was truly dramatic for her since she did not know if the information she heard about her loved one was true.

Families and whoever else the soldier writes down as a contact are supposed to be contacted first about the news of the troops.

Rana first got word of the troop extension from a friend, who learned of the news on the television. Nobody ever officially notified Rana that her husband-to-be would not be home for his wedding. She learned secondhand of a meeting called by the National Guard in Des Moines on Friday.

Members of the National Guard apologized for the way families became informed of the extension, but they were unable to give an explanation as to why it happened.

It should not have been presented to them on the news, especially since the news was sending mixed messages. One rumor informed Rana that the troops were to be extended up to a whole year. If news stations are not 100 percent positive about news-breaking news, then they should be responsible enough to let their viewers know they are not sure of the answer, and they will keep the viewers updated with any new information. What possible good could come out of leading people on with false information?

This is a very unethical outcome because families and others listed as contacts have the right to be the first ones notified about their soldier by a direct phone call. A promise made by the government was carelessly broken, which leaves a torn relationship between those soldiers' families and the government.

To ban or not to ban?

Oh, America the beautiful. How merciful the white stars and red and white stripes fly. Recently, the principal from St. Francis High School banned an image of a burning flag from the school paper from the fall school play.

This seems to be a pretty debatable topic. The flag is the greatest symbol we have to remind us what we, as Americans, stand for. Burning it is a disgrace to our country. But what about if it's a prop used in a play?

The paper and a national expert on school-newspaper censorship say he (the principal) had no legal right (to ban the image) because officials have always let the students make their own decisions and because that’s even spelled out in the school district’s written policy.

In addition to the school's policy, if the high school has allowed such a play to be performed then the picture in the paper should go hand in hand with the play. The principal has jumped the gun too soon.

If burning the flag was a main part in the play, then the photographer did a good job capturing the main action that summarizes the theme of the play. Don't get me wrong, I'm proud to be an American, but these students clearly weren't trying to deliberately create shame on our country. It's a play--probably a play with a good moral behind it, since it was allowed to be part of a school function.

Reporters receive invasive label

Are news people just doing their jobs when they are accused of invading people's personal lives? What about times of tragedy? Do you think they even stop and consider maybe it's wrong? The answer is probably "no", since they chose their occupation for a reason. We, as consumers, can change the way news is broadcasted.

Father John Morris says in order to make a change "it requires controlling our baser instincts which spur us toward gossip, sensationalism, and smut. But such virtue, surprisingly, has a way of making us very happy people". Also, as viewers, we are unknowingly participating in a voting system when we click on certain channels and stations.

At an unprecedented rate, hard news, good news, and non-sexualized news are disappearing.

Doesn't this seem morally wrong? It often seems to me that for major news corporations, the number one priority they strive for isn't always to get news out to the people. It is to make money. More and more of it.