Scribd
Upload
132 views22 pages

Models of Moral Reasoning

The document discusses two models of moral reasoning that can guide journalists when making ethical decisions - the Potter Box and the SAD Formula. The Potter Box involves analyzing an ethical problem through four dimensions: definition, values, principles, and loyalties. The SAD Formula involves defining the situation, analyzing it using moral theories, and making a decision. Both models provide systematic processes to help journalists appropriately define problems, consider relevant ethical factors, and arrive at well-reasoned conclusions. An example situation around publishing details of a child rape victim is provided to demonstrate how the Potter Box framework would be applied.

Uploaded by

faith essien
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
132 views22 pages

Models of Moral Reasoning

The document discusses two models of moral reasoning that can guide journalists when making ethical decisions - the Potter Box and the SAD Formula. The Potter Box involves analyzing an ethical problem through four dimensions: definition, values, principles, and loyalties. The SAD Formula involves defining the situation, analyzing it using moral theories, and making a decision. Both models provide systematic processes to help journalists appropriately define problems, consider relevant ethical factors, and arrive at well-reasoned conclusions. An example situation around publishing details of a child rape victim is provided to demonstrate how the Potter Box framework would be applied.

Uploaded by

faith essien
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 22

Models of moral

reasoning
When journalists and media practitioners are
faced with situations that require them to make
ethical decisions, it will be helpful if there are
models or frameworks that can guide that
decision making process. This is because
making editorial decisions to publish or not to
publish stories can be very challenging and
daunting.
The Potter Box
The Potter Box is a model of moral reasoning
formulated by Dr. Ralph Potter of Harvard
Divinity School.
According to Bowles and Borden (2004), the
Potter Box helps dissect a situation requiring
an ethical response by introducing four
dimensions of analysis:
The Potter Box
 Definition
 Values
 Principles
 Loyalties
To make a decision, we move through each
dimension-from defining the situation to
considering values to appealing to an ethical
principle to choosing loyalties- eventually
reasoning our way toward a solution.
The Potter Box
The Potter Box can be used to analyse the
dimensions of an ethical problem for
journalists. The first step is defining the
situation. It is followed by outlining the
possible values at work and determining the
relevant moral principles to apply. The next
step is choosing loyalties. After the four-stage
analysis, the final step is to make an ethical
decision about whether to publish.
A typical example of how this model will work
is presented below:
A magistrate court in Ota is trying a 59-year-
old man for the rape of his neighbour’s
daughter, a five-year-old girl. Your reporter
covered the committal proceeding and has the
name, details and pictures of the girl and the
accused. He wants the News Editor to publish
her details (e.g. name, age, address, school, but
not photograph) to convince readers that the
story is genuine.
The reporter believes the public should be
informed of the evil, the person who
committed it and on whom it was committed.
The News Editor however believes that the
story can be reported with only the age of the
victim and that of the defendant so that the
public is not given information about the man
in such full details as will make it easy to
identify who the girl is.
As the Editor, the final decision rests with you.
You can therefore use the Potter Box to take a
final decision in this way:
Step 1: Define the situation. The Reporter
sees the situation as that of an evil that the
public must be informed of while the News
Editor sees publishing the full details of the
victim and the alleged criminal in bad taste.
Step 2: Identify the values in the choices.
 The Reporter has identified these values as
benefits of publishing the details of the girl and
her assailant in the story
 It is an important event the public ought to be
aware of.
 The public need have the details of the girl so
they can protect children her age, thereby
correcting the erroneous impression that
children that age cannot be victims.
The News Editor has identified these values as
benefits of not publishing the details of the girl
and her assailant in the story:
 The story may affect the girl if anyone can
refer it to her in the future.
 It is an ethical value not to publish the details
of rape victims, especially children. Children
involved in criminal proceedings should be
protected.
 The story can still be published without the full
details of the girl.
 The newspaper’s unwritten policy is to protect
minors in all situations.
Step 3: Appeal to moral principles to justify
your decision.
 You can use the utilitarian principle which
advocates “The greatest good for the greatest
number” by agreeing that the society needs to
be aware that such evil can occur and be
enlightened on the possibilities of preventing it
by giving them the full details of the victim.
 At the same time, you can apply the absolutist
view of “Right is right and wrong is wrong” by
sticking to the paper’s policy of protecting
minors.
Step 4: Choose loyalties.
This is the last step and it is also the most
challenging. It is the point at which you decide where
your loyalty lies. “To whom is the highest moral duty
owed? Is the first loyalty to yourself, to the
newspaper, to the family of the victim, to the readers,
to your readers, to your colleagues or to the society?”
Bowles and Borden (2004).

The reporter might argue that the ultimate loyalty is


to the society and the readers who the newspaper owe
an obligation to inform and educate on such menace
as rape occurring to children from trusted individuals.
The News Editor might argue that the loyalty
is to the newspaper’s policy and to the victim
and her family who will likely be traumatised
by the publication of a story that gives their
full identification to the entire public.

After reasoning through the four dimensions of


the Potter Box which are definition, values,
principles and loyalty, you can therefore take a
decision using the reasoning process while
bringing your personal ethics and values to
bear.
Bowles and Borden (2004) however note that
“Unfortunately, reporters and editors do not
often use such methods to make moral
judgments. They either react instinctively,
hoping that they will make the right decision
and that the negative consequences will not be
too overpowering, or they try to find answers
in a professional code of ethics.”
The SAD Formula
The SAD Formula
Louis Alvin Day (2006) in his book Ethics of
Communication put together a system of moral
reasoning called the SAD Formula that can assist
media professionals and organisations make
ethical decisions and deal with ethical issues.
He argues that “Moral reasoning is a systematic
process that involves numerous considerations, all of
which can be grouped into three categories:
(1) The situation definition;
(2) The analysis of the situation, including the
application of moral theories; and
(3) The decision, or ethical judgment.
Hence, the acronym SAD formula.
There are, of course, other models available,
but the SAD formula seems particularly
adaptable to the needs of the moral reasoning
neophyte .
It is obvious that this model is similar to Potter
Box and Day (2006) himself agrees that his
model is based, in part, on ideas advanced by
Ralph B. Potter
From the foregoing discussion, it is apparent
that there are different or numerous models of
moral reasoning but they all focused on
helping the journalist and/or the media
organisation appreciate the situation, analyse it
using ethical theories and principles and then
finally make a decision based on the
systematic process.
Thank you

You might also like