Personal ethics

Write a journal post that examines your personal ethical outlook using the ethical frameworks you have read about this week. Evaluate your personal ethical framework by examining it from a meta-ethical perspective. Note that you may draw on more than one type of ethical framework in your own decision making. Why might this be a good idea? What are the sources of your personal ethical framework? 

This weeks reading were not about ethical frameworks for non-communication professionals. The only article about basic ethics was the article from Santa Clara University. I have a basic disagreement about the meaning of ethics vs morals. I believe that ethics are a group mentality and our morals are our personal decisions, but I will use your wording for this assignment. 
My ethical framework is highly personalized. Because I do not follow a recognized religion, my ethical basis does not start on that level as many people's do. I do have and enjoy having deep conversations about my own ethics and their basis. Really this means that my ethics are not easily described and more open to interpretation and change. I agree with most basic human ethics- murder is wrong, helping others is good and such. Thus the source of my personal ethical framework is conversations that I have with others and reading. My ethics are still being formed and reinforced by my interactions with society. 
I would say I align more with the rights approach mentioned by Velasquez et al. (2009). I also believe in working for the common good, and I am a Democrat because of my alignment with these ideals.  According to Gallup polls, I am currently in the third lowest rated ethical profession- car sales and hope to move down to a even worse ranked profession: lobbying ("Honesty/ethics in Professions," 2013). I am not beholden to any ethics laid out by an ad agency group since I am not a member (Neff, 2011). My employer expects me to not follow my own ethical guidelines. 

References

Honesty/ethics in professions. (2013, December 5). Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx

Moyer, J. (2011, January 7). Ethics and public relations. Retrieved from http://www.instituteforpr.org/ethics-and-public-relations/
Neff, J. (2011, March 17). Advertisers, agencies get new ethics code for review. Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/news/advertisers-agencies-ethics-code-review/149464/

Velasquez, M., Moberg, D., Meyer, M. J., Shanks, T., McLean, M. R., DeCosse, D., ... Hanson, K. O. (2009, May). A framework for thinking ethically. Retrieved from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/framework.html

Final Paper

 analyzes the legal and ethical issues related to digital media surrounding a current event. The paper will also include a self-reflection on how the implications of the current event affect one’s personal ethical framework and role as a communications professional.

I am not excited for this paper. I am not a long, drawn out writer. I am not sure I will be able to write 15 pages about anything. 



Internet neutrality is currently under threat. How this issue plays out greatly effects digital media future. Legally, companies are fighting it under freedom of speech. As with many internet issues, there is not precedent in this new area of speech. So far the laws they have written have failed after much public involvement.  Ethically, organizations are fighting these new rules from internet providers because it violates their codes. This issue will not affect my personal ethical framework as much as it affects my internet freedom. As a communications professional I may be affected when trying to get views and get content published. 

People change, laws change.

Hi audience- I am on to my next class which has journals instead of blogs but I will keep sharing with you because I love you soooo much. 


What are the sources of law? What is the meaning of law as it has evolved in the United States? What has caused these laws to evolve? Are there situations when breaking a law is acceptable? Provide examples to support your answers.

Laws are created by our government. The US government as we see it now was formed by the signing of the Constitution in 1787. The three branches of government, executive, judicial and legislative, all create laws in different ways. Technically, the whole purpose of the legislative branch is to create laws. Laws are then amended by the judicial branch or executive. Laws are created to protect people from each other and from the government, and to ensure efficiency of government bodies. Government has grown with our country and thus our laws have changed. When America was first formed our population was all of 3,929,214 and there are now about 318,679,000  Americans ("Demographic History of the United States," 2014). The size of land governed by our laws and the cultures protected have changed and grown. Early America was not the melting pot it is today. Our nation's religious morals have changed. Technology's growth has changed how laws and crimes can be carried out.  Our most basic government structure and inalienable rights have not changed since we signed the Constitution. But the laws pertaining to our rights and how they are limited have changed. Some of us that were not granted equal rights in the Constitution had to fight to get them much later. It only makes sense with how much change the world has seen that our laws have also evolved.

Of course there are times when you should break laws. If our laws were perfect they would never have to change. Sometimes breaking the law illuminates that is it not just and proper. Some laws have been abandoned over time, such as sodomy laws, which shows that sometimes laws are not correct. Through out prohibition people everywhere were breaking that law and it lead to that laws repeal. Before Roe v Wade illegal abortions were commonplace. This was unfortunate because it lead to unnecessary deaths but sometimes saved lives of women that would have had to resort to other options. The deaths highlighted the public health implications of keeping this otherwise safe and normal procedure out of the realm of regulation. Civil disobedience can be acceptable when carried out the right way. Some people would argue that the large amount of protest helped bring an earlier withdrawal from Vietnam. Although we have a right to protest, many people look extraordinary measures. Everyone today would say that civil disobedience in the civil rights demonstrations was acceptable, even if they didn't agree at the time.

Demographic history of the United States. (2014, August 30). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_the_United_States