The Associated Press Stylebook dictates that the identification by race or ethnicity is pertinent in three specific areas. Journalists should identify a subject’s race if it is a significantly groundbreaking or historic event. For instance, if the subject of a journalists story is the first Hispanic nominee for the Nobel Prize. Journalists should also identify a subject’s race or ethnicity if it is an individual that is being searched for, such as a missing person or fugitive. Finally, report race if you are writing a story about a disturbance or demonstration in which race is a pertinent factor, like a civil rights demonstration.

Near the bottom of the section in the stylebook on race, it says “In other situations with racial overtones, use news judgement.” This is where the grey area arises and where ethics comes in to play. Good news judgement is based solely upon ethics, which as we know vary from person to person. While there are some technical guidelines for when identifying race is important, when is it irrelevant or even harmful?

The inciting incident can arguably be the shooting of Trayvon Martin and the trial of George Zimmerman. This incident has sparked a flame within the discussion of race in America that has only grown stronger with time. There has always been racial tension displayed in the media, but none as prominent as it has been in recent years. The case of Trayvon Martin has inspired such movements as #BlackLivesMatter, which have grown in strength in the media with each incident that has involved racial tension in America.

This analysis also shines a light on framing in the media. Framing is a bias set up by the media outlet in which the audience will react different to facts put in front of them based off of how it is presented. It is important to be cognizant of how you are framing stories as the news outlet and the audience must be aware of this trend as well and practice media literacy.

This analysis ties in to agenda setting, as well. Agenda setting is the media’s ability to tell us what is important in society through the use of trigger words. Though a prominent factor in the media it may be best it is avoiding due to the social uproar some issues may cause based on the media’s ability to set the salience of the ideas provide to the audiences perception of reality.

The question has become when is race really pertinent in the media? When has the media including race only perpetuated the rifts created between the races? Have headlines in the current media become too centered on race? Most importantly, what is good news judgement?

A key aspect in deducing an answer to these questions lies in the facts presented to us today. The original headline for the story of Trayvon Martin read, “Boy, 17, shot to death in Sanford during 'altercation,' police say” in the Orlando Sentinel. There was no mention of race at any point in the article. Why? There was no mention of it because it was not pertinent to the story. A boy was shot in an altercation. There were no missing people in which a detailed description would be required.

The point in which this became a racial discussion was when evidence came out of what George Zimmerman said to Trayvon Martin moments before his death. It was unclear whether or not he said any racial slurs due to the quality of the recording. It was discussed by Trayvon’s parents and their lawyer on the Today Show. When this information was released the story then became about race.

In the New York Daily News they quoted President Obama saying “If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon, and I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened.” Does this quote perpetuate the idea that this incident was about race? There is no doubt that what George Zimmerman said to Trayvon that day was not positive, but was it about the color of his skin and is this therefore important seeking the truth and reporting it?

Taking an in depth look at the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, the first two statutes are seek the truth and report it and minimize harm. These rules are essential in deciding what stance a news story takes on. Yes, all journalists must report the facts but it is up to each individual and editor to decide what the focus of their story is one. They must choose what quotes to include. Was it best to include President Obama’s quote pointing out the color of Trayvon’s skin?

This news story, and many like it, get national coverage. The stories quickly take on a racial stance whether or not they are technically a matter of race. In the case of the Trayvon Martin it was unclear whether or not the shooting was about race. It was unclear what George Zimmerman said on the recording so is it best to discuss it in the media and perpetuate the racial aspect of the case? It was an important aspect of whether or not George Zimmerman should be prosecuted. Did he shoot at Trayvon because he genuinely felt threatened or did he only feel threatened by the color of Trayvon’s skin?

These are rather unanswerable questions. Do news outlets choose to minimize the harm, protect the public from the outrage that unanswerable questions caused? In the attempt to seek the truth and report it, they must reveal all aspects of the case, it is just the manner in which they do so that is the way in which they can abide by both statutes of the code of ethics. This leads back to journalists using good news judgement. An essential part of good news judgement is incorporating the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics.

One of the most important philosophies to employ in journalism is John Rawls’ “veil of ignorance” in which you must not consider any past aspects of the story that do not directly affect the story at hand. This can easily be translated to the idea of race disclosure in the media. If it does not directly affect the story at hand, does it need to be disclosed or should you implement the “veil of ignorance”? In the scheme of things the “veil of ignorance” should be implemented in every story written and can arguably be the key to good news judgement. Paying close attention to relevance is an important trait for all journalists.

One of Rawls’ other principles is that the goal of society is to promote justice. The statue of Lady Justice, or Iustitia the Roman goddess of Justice, is equipped with a scale, a balance and a blindfold. Perhaps the “veil of ignorance” is derivative of the final attribute of Lady Justice. Justice is blind and all reporters should keep that in mind when disclosing or discussing race especially in stories involving crime.

Another philosophy to consider when disclosing race in a news story is John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism. Is the stance you are taking on the story at hand doing the most good to the most amount of people? The moral worth of an act lies in its consequences according to John Stuart Mill. It is impossible to know the consequences that may come from perpetuating racial friction in the media but through observing past examples it becomes a bit clearer what you should disclose and what is not pertinent to the story and only results in issues.

Through the implementation of these philosophies it becomes easier to used good news judgement. The providers of the world news should be held to a higher standard of moral development. Though most individuals operate on the conventional stage of morality, in which they are driven by social approval and authority, journalists should operate on a post-conventional stage of morality. In this stage they are driven by a balance of social order, rights and their own moral principles. They must choose the moral principles that guide them and I think in the issue of race portrayal in the media they should refer to the ideas of Mill and Rawls.

Journalists’ main loyalty must be to the public they serve their news to. The reason they are employed should also be what drives them daily in their efforts to seek the truth and report it. This may be where a journalist first embarks in a grey area. Is race disclosure and discussion an aspect of the truth itself? Does it perpetuate a rift between races, stigmatizing people of all races and ethnicities? This may not be in the best interest of minimizing harm due to the riots and more death it may incite.

In the case of Trayvon Martin’s death, should the media have been discussing the possibility of George Zimmerman uttering racial slurs? It is hard to judge whether or not that was an aspect of the truth that needed to be reported before it was verified what he said. This may play into the fast-paced nature of the news today.

This fast-paced nature plays in to the loyalty to the editor. In the end it is the editor’s call whether or not a story will run but also how it is framed. How much trust are you putting in your editor when you hand in a story that involves a racial issue? It is up to the journalist to decide if they want to get involved in a story that may perpetuate a racial issue in the media.

You must be loyal, as a journalist, to yourself as well. This means to take in to account the philosophies that you follow and how you implement them in your work. If the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics is something you hold near and dear to your heart then let it show in your work. Perhaps the second statute, minimize harm, is more important to you than the first, seek the truth and report it. As a journalist you may have to make a judgement call. This judgement call may fall under the grey area of ethics, which is why there are so many other influences to take in to account when making that tough call.

Finally, journalists have a loyalty to whom they are reporting. In the case of George Zimmerman, due to the framing of this story in the news he received death threats. Did he in fact say racial slurs to Trayvon? It was unclear, but what is clear is that the framing of this situation did not minimize harm for that individual. Then of course, was reporting on the possibility of him saying racial slurs more important to the greater good for the most amount of people at the expense of this one individual? Yet another aspect to consider.

In conclusion, I think that when dealing with race it is a very sensitive subject that has a lot of grey area. It is important as a journalist to adhere to the code of ethics prescribed by the Society of Professional Journalists. It should be the very first thing you adhere to in your field.

The next thing that should be consulted is the Associated Press Stylebook. The first three things listed in pertinence to race disclosure in a news story should be the main ones most journalists are dealing with.

When it comes to the grey area of good news judgement, a journalist must employ the use of other moral and ethical strategies. The first of which should be the philosophies that you personally adhere to. For myself, as a journalist, I pay close attention to the philosophies of Mill and Rawls. I think it is important to maintain a “veil of ignorance” when reporting especially when it comes to the discussion of race. If it is not absolutely pertinent then I would be hesitant to include it. I would also analyze if my article is providing the greatest good for the most people.

Finally, I would analyze my loyalties. First and foremost, my job as a journalist would be to the public. It is my responsibility to inform them and I would do that in the best way I knew how in close regard to my morals and ethics. I then must be loyal to the subjects that I write about and be wary of the fact that what I write effects their lives.