An Ethics Analysis of Joseph Wilsons Commentary - Research Paper Example

An Ethics Analysis of Joseph Wilson’s Commentary Question Which philosopher and/or ethical philosophy did Wilson follow in making a decision to write and publish his piece? Wilson’s commentary on the justification of the Bush Administration in invading Iraq was written as an eye-opener about things that were otherwise unknown to most people not just in the United States, but also around the world. Many people were hearing news about Saddam Hussein importing raw uranium ore from Africa, and Wilson was “lead to a small role in the effort to verify information about Africa’s suspected link to Iraq’s nonconventional weapons programs” (Wilson). His stay in Niger proved this allegation to be the opposite, and he made an unwritten report about this travel to the White House. This decision of making the truth known to the public is based on the ethical principle of transparency, which is an important part of communication “...based on the notion of an honest exchange” (Plaisance 44). It was mentioned in the commentary that despite Wilson’s transparency and honesty in verifying that Niger was not actually capable of exporting uranium ores due to stringent measures in the whole process, the Bush Administration decided to keep the public blind to this truth, and even dismissed Wilson’s report. This lack of transparency in reporting about the status of the uranium imports of Iraq from Africa abused the trusting nature of the public and kept them away from the issues that Wilson actually experienced first-hand, and this prompted him to air out his concerns regarding the misconception of most people with the real issues in Iraq and Saddam Hussein. The act of transparency is also rooted in the belief that people have a right to know about the truth, and that the distortions of information could cause not just misinformation in the audience but also unprecedented troubles such as panic and disorder (Plaisance 47). Wilson chose not to keep quiet about how the information he knows got dismissed for the sake of the public, and he wrote it out in his commentary under the ethical principle of transparency. Question 2: Place yourself in Wilson’s position. What kinds of decisions/choices would you make if you were in the same situation? Would you have written the piece? Which philosopher and/or ethical philosophy help guide your decisions? The act of being transparent in communication is not just involved with some issues like whether or not there are hidden motives for transparency, but also the trust of the people involved in these communications is also at stake. Wilson banked on this ethical guideline in giving the public true information in creating his commentary on how his report regarding the true status of the Iraq-Niger uranium connection was silenced by the administration, which consequently perpetuated the fears within people about the potential danger that Iraq poses. His defiance of the information dispersed by the government was shown in his commentary, and while it might have cost him his life, it was worth knowing that at least somehow he did not simply stand and keep his silence. If I was in the same position as Wilson was, I would have done the same and have written a similar piece, maybe add additional and credible information for the reading public. Since this is important information that the public has a right to know but the government keeps from them, I feel that as a public servant I have a duty to the people of delivering them the truth. I would also do the same thing that Wilson did, by writing his own account of what really happened, and letting the people decide on the authenticity of my work. If I put myself in Wilson’s place on writing the commentary about the reality of Niger not really having the ability to bring uranium ore illegally to Iraq, I would have chosen to be transparent with what I know, not just to regain the public’s trust on some members of the government, but also to assure them that not all threats are real, and that there are some issues that needed to be addressed even more. In relation to this, I would be using Immanuel Kant’s humanity principle as an inspiration to continue serving the people in ways that I am capable of, and being as honest and transparent as I can is the least I can do in this kind of service. Also, because of the increasing sophistication of the media and other information networks, it would be better to speak of the truth and provide transparency about issues rather than clouding everyone with crafted lies, since sooner or later truths become exposed and would humiliate the people or groups responsible for such lies. With respect to Kant’s vision, many companies and influential groups are now taking strides in the upkeep of transparency among their stakeholders and consumers, which is a good thing since it restores the trust of the people somehow, and this is one of the few acts that constitute the respect and honouring of human dignity (Plaisance 60). Transparency, honesty, and arguing the rightness of decisions are actions deemed positive in most human societies, and based on Immanuel Kant’s views that an act is moral “if it may be endorsed as acceptable behaviour for everyone” (Plaisance 50). But transparency is also hard to come by, as many larger groups such as companies, political parties and even advertisers falsify information in order to gain greater income, followers, and power. This creates a twisted view or even complete blocking of the truth, and because people believe mostly what they see coming from powerful and influential people, it would be harder for them to be convinced by smaller or less influential groups that happen to hold the truth in their hands. But I believe that any amount of truth, whether painful or not, is still a lot better than nice-sounding lies since being transparent and honest about many things show that people capable of doing so recognises the people they interact with are also of the same level and respects them, while those using deceitful tactics undermine the human nature of most people and demote them to mere objects or tools. Restoring a part of human dignity through honesty and transparency is the first step in giving this back to the public, and I believe Wilson was able to do so by being honest with the public through his commentary, even though it can be considered to be a dangerous expose. If I was in his place, I would also do the same thing about honesty and somehow bringing back the dignity of people. Works Cited Plaisance, Patrick Lee. Media Ethics: Key Principles for Responsible Practice. SAGE Publications, Inc., 2008. Print. Wilson, Joseph C. What I Didn't Find in Africa - New York Times. 06 July 2003. 24 March 2013 . Read More