Lying to Tell the Truth: Journalists and the Social Context of Deception

Abstract

This study, based on depth interviews with journalists, is an analysis of the social context of journalistic deception. Borrowing from Elliot and Culver's (1992) comprehensive definition of journalistic deception that covered not only newsgathering practices but also the potential for deception in journalists' relationships with news audiences, as well as the omission-commission distinction, this research is an empirical attempt to locate the occupational and individual-grounded bases for deception. Why do journalists use deceptive methods such as impersonations, nonidentifications, and fabrication in their work? Deception is located in a moral-pragmatic framework based on harm-benefit, the altruism of the act, and instrumental utilities such as convenience, personal safety, and the bottom line. Woven into the journalists' accounts are attempts to normalize deceptive behavior-consistent with the notion of deception as a prima facie wrong-and the salience of organizational pressures such as legal and business concerns. As an occupational construct, journalistic deception is shaped by professional demands. Tacit rules govern what is acceptable and unacceptable deception based on assessments of the target of deception (newsmakers vs. news audiences), the perceived character of the person deceived (good vs. bad), and the nature of the act (omission vs. commission).