Answer:
Minimize harm because the protester might be affected by the interview.
Seek truth because the protester made a statement about a major issue.
Explanation:
The SPJ Code of Ethics is a guide that encourages journalists to take responsibility for the information they provide. It is not a strict set of rules, but it's important either way because some basic principles need to be followed in sensitive cases, such as this one.
As the protester is a minor, she needs to be protected. That's why the harm should be minimized as much as it's possible. But, at the same time, there is a possibility that the mother is not telling the truth. It is understandable that she may not want her daughter to be exposed, but the truth matters. If the protester is aware of the fact her face may be on television and wants to be heard, it should be alright to air the interview. After all, she spoke about an important issue. That's why the reporter should seek the truth and then try making the right decision.
Thus, the correct options are the last two.
Great work!! I hope you don’t have any trouble finding that answer
Answer:
Feldman reaches the conclusion that most people are honest without receiving an incentive by
studying a counterclaim about morality and arriving at a broad generalization.
Explanation:
A researcher can reach a conclusion that most people are honest after studying a counterclaim about morality. He can then arrive at a broad generalization.
A counterclaim is the opposite of an argument, or simply, the opposing argument. A counterclaim research is one undertaken to establish that the opposite of a research situation prevails. It is a claim made against a situation or an established position in order to rebut the claimed position.
In this instance, Glaucon had taken a position that no man could resist the temptation of evil if he knew his acts could not be witnessed or dictated. For Feldman to contradict this claim, with a conclusion that 87% of the time, a man could resist the temptation of evil even if he knew his acts could not be witnessed or dictated because he had become invisible, it means that he had researched the counterclaim.
Answer:
Confidence in one’s intelligence and inner worth
