Born Just Right

(www.bornjustright.com)

Micro Issues                     

The blog Born Just Right is a very personal blog about the life and challenges of a little girl and her family, to some extent. It only violates the privacy of the Reeves family if they do not want to share that information. But, since they are willingly putting that information on the Internet, it is assumed that it’s not a violation.

Kant would evaluate this blog by justifying its creation as a response to a need, therefore making it ethically sound. The act was prompted by a mother’s need to acquire and share knowledge.  Aristotle on the other hand, would judge the ethical standard of the blog based on the mother’s character and what it is she is actually doing with the blog. The mother’s behavior with the blog, for example what she chooses to write about and what activities she exposed her daughter to, are all up for ethical consideration, according to Aristotle.

The author’s journalistic experience plays a large part in the success of this blog. As the case study points out, maintaining a blog is time-consuming and in some cases can become arduous. There is no doubt that the mother’s training helped her in several ways. First, she is professionally interested in journalism and new media as a professor of the subject. Also, her ability to explore and develop her media interests no doubt helped in fueling her drive to maintain her personal family blog.

Midrange Issues

Monetizing the blog would absolutely change its character. It would also change its content. Loyalty is a value that exists on a continuum, according to the text. The loyalty of the blog would shift if it began to monetize. The loyalty would change from sharing her daughter’s life experiences to pleasing her advertisers, either by selling/advertising certain things her daughter is using or by introducing things into her daughter’s life unnaturally just to feature it on the website. In terms of truthtelling, that may be affected as well. To what extent, I cannot tell at this point. The blog is primarily about her daughter’s experiences in life. I’m not sure how monetizing could effect the truthfulness of telling her daughter’s experiences.

In terms of this case study, I do not think it’s ethically wrong for Jen Reeves, the blog’s author, to have reviewed it. It depends on whether or not she had the ability to change facts or details from the case study. If she merely read it, I would say the textbook’s loyalty would still be to its readers and to the education of the reader. Bok’s ethical decision-making calls us to ask if there is another acceptable way to achieve the same goal. It’s possible Jen Reeves could have not read the case study before it was published.  But, if she was not allowed to give her approval, does it truly affect the outcome of the decision? I don’t think so.

Marketing of Jen Reeves’ blog would be a relatively easy task to undertake. As of today, she has over 3,000 unique visitors to her site, her site has a niche market - parents of children with “limb differences”, and her site provides a unique – and free – longstanding observation of a the ability of a child born with a limb deformity. She could easily market to parents, scientists and prosthetic manufactures. The money she raises from this fund could contribute to the overall fabric of the society, making it an “easy pass” for the TARES advertising test. The content of the blog would be socially responsible as would be the use of the funds raised (if it went toward her daughter’s college education or for future prosthetics).

As we saw from some of the socially responsible ads in class, marketing that makes people aware of – or challenge – social norms is marketing that adds considerably to the “market”. It makes the consumer more socially educated, thus able to make a better moral decision. The content on Reeve’s blog tells an uncommon story. Marketing this story could help to improve the community’s perspective of families with this unique situation.

Though the blog is substantial and seemingly has an interested audience, the narrowness of the topic makes it not news worthy on a larger scale. It’s a very niche blog. As a news consumer, I’d be more interested if this blog started marketing or monetizing and raised a significant amount of awareness or money outside of its target audience.

Macro Issues

The Born Just Right blog is definitely new media. Whether or not it’s journalism is up for debate. The chapter talks about the “citizen journalist”. In many cases, blogging is a throwback to journalism’s origins. The chapter mentioned that interviewing was looked down upon when first introduced to the journalism profession. The “first informer” model was the way news was reported. In many ways, this blog is a first informer journalist report. Where else is the information about a disabled girl’s challenges and triumphed reported? The discoveries for this family are news-breaking for people in their situation. The argument can be said that the author isn’t assuming a reporter’s role while documenting her daughter’s life, but I would ask: Is journalism merely the collection – or qualification of the collector – of information or is it the dissemination of information? Because regardless of the way the info is gathered, it cannot be news until it’s told. The blog is original content, something coveted in the journalism field. It’s also adapted to the emergence of social media. With all things considered this blog can be considered journalism in its own form.