Date: May 12, 2011
To: Dr. Moore
From: Amy Rourke
Regarding: News case study on Juan Williams Commentary on Muslims
The Facts of the Case:
Longtime NPR news analyst, Juan Williams was fired following comments he made regarding
Muslims and terrorism in an appearance on Fox News. Williams made the remarks during a
debate with Bill O’Reilly over the perceived tensions regarding Muslims in America, and
O’Reilly’s contention that Muslims were responsible for American deaths on 9/11.
In response to O’Reilly’s remarks, Williams said, “But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I
see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first
and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous." Williams also made other comments
about his opinions about Muslims and terrorism.
The Council for American-Islamic Relations released a press statement urging NPR to address
the comments, which it called “irresponsible and inflammatory.” NPR took action, firing
Williams, who had been previously warned not to speak publicly about his personal opinions
related to issues in the news. NPR defended its actions, citing a code of journalistic ethics that
prohibits employees from making statements of opinion that could damage the credibility of
the news station. Williams, alternately, defended his actions in an article entitled, “I Was Fired for
Telling the Truth.”
Case Values:
Clearly, both of the competing forces within this case had strong values at stake. Williams
valued his right for freedom of speech and his right to express his opinions in various outlets. He
defended his statements as ethical based on their value as the truth. He valued credibility in
that he thought that being honest and open furthered his believability; he also valued his
audience, in that he felt that they deserved to know his honest opinions on current issues that
he often covered as a journalist. William’s seemed to feel a certain responsibility to be honest
about his opinion, even though the statements he made may not have been the popular
consensus.
Conversely, NPR seemed to value credibility over truth. The viewpoint that, regardless of the
truth of Williams’ statement, the opinions could be detrimental to the organization’s credibility
as a whole shows that NPR saw Williams actions as a threat to their credibility. NPR also placed
value on remaining unbiased and did not want to be associated with Fox News or any slanted
opinions being portrayed as news. NPR also seems to value power, based on the decision to
terminate the contract with Williams rather than warn or suspend him. NPR also felt an
obligation to society not to promote fear or disparage a group of people in way that could
promote prejudice among society.
Case Principles:
This case can be viewed using the principles in Confucius’ Golden Mean. While journalists may
unintentionally display some bias or allow their personal opinions to become known, they
should seek a balance of withholding certain opinions that can produce a climate of bias. Rather
than expressing personal viewpoints on news issues, journalist must seek to remain fair and
balanced in their dealing with the news, rather than affect their ultimate goal of serving the
public. Williams seemed to make an effort to make his personal opinions known which, as a
journalist can be problematic in its effects.
Confucious’ Golden Mean is particularly effective in dealing with this case because this case
deals with two competing values that must both be carefully maintained. Rather than choosing
either truthfulness or credibility as being more important, it is more beneficial to find a balance
between the two through temperance.
Case Loyalties:
NPR stayed loyal to its audience and also to journalists overall, by setting an example about how
the news should be handled in order to remain unbiased. NPR also had a loyalty to
organizations and groups that were offended by Williams’ comments. Beyond those groups,
NPR also has a responsibility to the public to remain unbiased and to not place judgments or
harm on any certain groups.
Williams remained loyal to himself by standing by the comments that he made even after he
had dealt with the consequences. Williams also had loyalties to journalist who wish to express
their own opinions on issues and to his perceived audience which he felt would benefit from
knowing his viewpoints.
Analysis:
This case is immensely important for journalists. Many codes of ethics for news organizations
prohibit journalist from publicly expressing opinions that could reveal some form of bias or
damage the credibility of an organization. I think it is important for journalists to be cognizant
of the effects of their actions and how these actions may reflect on those they are affiliated with.
Journalist must also be aware that they will often face competing values within the workplace
that will require a balance of different priorities. By being able to think through consequences
and also being clear about where loyalties lie, journalist will be more likely to balance their
loyalties rather than taking extreme action.
References:
Calderone, M. (2010) NPR fires Juan Williams for Muslim remarks on Fox. http://news.yahoo.com
Farhi, P. (2010) Juan Williams at odds with NPR over dismissal. WashingtonPost.com
Memmott, M. (2010) Review of Juan Williams firing done. NPR.org
Williams, J. (2010) I was fired for telling the truth. FoxNews.com