|
| Impact of High Visibility Corporate Scandal on Business Student Attitude (Paper) The following paper by Professor Susan Eisner appears in the 2003 Proceedings of the Society for the Advancement of Management Annual Conference. (Note: The software for this webpage does not support tables. Figures and tables that appear in the published paper may not appear "boxed" or tabled, here, as a result; spacing within tables may also be distorted) Abstract Corporate scandals and bankruptcies were among the top ten media stories of 2002. The public now respects business people even less than they respect politicians, and jurists are more anti-business than ever before. As tomorrow’s business leaders are being educated today, a survey was conducted to determine the effect of media-presented examples of unethical business behavior on business students’ attitudes, and to identify resulting areas of interest for business schools to consider. Introduction The twenty-four hour news cycle has heightened the opportunity for current events to become broadly disseminated and part of the national consciousness. A recent survey by The Gallup Organization found that 73% of respondents watch local TV news, 59% watch nightly network news programs, 56% watch cable news networks, 47% watch public television news, 39% watch morning network news and interview programs, 32% listen to radio talk shows, 31% listen to National Public Radio, and 23% retrieve news on the Internet at least several times a week (Newport, 2003). Ratings tend to increase “when something important occurs.” This appears to be especially so for people of college student age (under age 30) (Pew Research Center, 2002). In the first nineteen days of the 2003 War with Iraq, for instance, viewing of each of the three major cable television news networks by those 18-34 multiplied five-six times (Johnson, 2003). The intense media competition operating within this “always on” environment has in recent years produced a constant stream of event-driven, scandal-focused stories broadcast to international audiences that number in the millions (Iorio, 1999). Coverage of the O.J. Simpson trial put Court TV on the map, made media stars of its correspondents, and provided a formula through with the impeachment of President Clinton and the disappearance of Chandra Levy became part of a viewer’s daily life. A genre of “reality TV” has been spawned since, watched in large numbers – some 80 million viewers watched during one week alone in February 2003 (Matthews, 2003), and appears to be particular appealing to younger viewers (Carter, 2003). Although local news historically attracts much higher ratings than national or international news (Newport, 2003), cable news networks drew record audiences through its continued coverage of the 2000 national Presidential election as the “Battle of the Ballot” (Hall, 2001). Subsequently, headlines shifted to unethical practices by businesses previously identified by many as role models such as Enron, Arthur Andersen, and Martha Stewart. The World Almanac and Book of Facts lists “corporate scandals and bankruptcies” among the top ten news stories of 2002. Other top media stories of 2002 include the war on terrorism, possible war with Iraq, conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, sniper shootings in Washington D.C., and sexual improprieties of Catholic priests (World Almanac and Book of Facts, 2003). Response to high visibility corporate scandals has been vocal and widespread. A New York Times op-ed piece declared business schools a failure at teaching ethics, and stated they should instead emphasize teaching law (Prentice, 2002). Business people are now held in lower esteem than politicians (Merritt, 2002). Traditionally close relationships between academia and the corporate sector are being questioned as having created among MBAs a “greed is good” culture where maximizing shareholder wealth is emphasized over anything else (Mangan, 2002), and having resulted in MBAs graduating from business schools prioritizing profit goals far more and social goals far less than when they entered (Student Attitudes Survey, 2002). A recent study reports anti-business attitudes of jurors stronger than ever, finding jurors ready “to punish” with billion-dollar verdicts and skeptical of government’s ability to “keep corporations in line” (Loomis, 2002). Time chose whistleblowers at Enron, Worldcom, and FBI as 2002 Persons of the Year, citing the three women’s efforts to “restore confidence in business and government … in a year that saw our trust in American institutions tested so severely” (Kelly, 2002). Experiences while teaching business school classes at Ramapo College of New Jersey indicate that students are aware of these high visibility examples, do not fully understand them, but know that they pertain to career tracks for which the students are preparing themselves. Prior personal experience may also be a sensitizing factor in this study. As a graduate student at the Kennedy School of Government preparing for a career in public service, I worked at the Watergate Headquarters at the time of the 1972 break-in. Revelations about the political process I was preparing to enter resulted in a career shift away from government to television, the industry of those who went public with the story. Many of my cohorts also changed careers away from politics as a result of the Watergate scandal. Tomorrow’s employees and MBA students are being educated in undergraduate business schools today. The impact recent corporate scandals have had on their attitudes is, then, important to understand. This paper seeks to contribute to the current dialog regarding ethical conduct in business by exploring the impact of recent corporate scandals on the ethical attitudes of business students. Methodology An extensive literature review was conducted to provide a base from which to examine the impact on business student attitudes of media-portrayed examples of business misconduct. The stories receiving the most media coverage were identified, as were topics prioritized in public opinion polls. From this foundation, factors contributing to ethical attitudes itemized in Post/Lawrence/Weber’s leading Business and Society textbook (Post, 2002) were considered in designing a comprehensive survey distributed to more than 200 college students in February 2003. The extent to which respondents felt such stories should be presented by media, followed and understood those stories, considered the corporate behaviors presented in the stories to be unethical, and altered their choices regarding work or school as a result of these stories were queried, as was the nature of respondents’ ethical attitudes. Open-ended comments were invited at the end of the questionnaire. The survey instrument was pre-tested on a pilot group representative of the sample to be surveyed. The major respondent cohort group (203 students) was surveyed at Ramapo College, a four-year public college with 5500 (5143 undergraduate) students in the New Jersey state system, located 40 miles northwest of New York City. To provide a basis of comparison, samples at two different institutions were also queried: 28 undergraduate business students at Fordham University in New York City, and a core group of four non-business graduate students at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. Detailed findings are reported below, with majority responses appearing in bold. Survey Sample Some 205 students in business school classes at Ramapo College responded to this survey at the start of the Spring 2003 semester. Demographics of survey respondents are consistent with enrollment demographics of the college: · Age of respondents – 17-22: 78.4%; 22-27: 17.1%; Other: 4.5%. · Gender of respondents – Female: 52.2%; Male 47.8%. · College class of respondents – Junior: 35.6%; Senior: 22.8%; Freshman: 22.8%; Sophomore: 18.3%; Graduate: .5%. · Major of respondents – Business Administration (finance, management, marketing): 51.5%; Accounting: 22.1%; Business/Other (economics, information systems, international business): 12.7%; Liberal Arts/Science: 1.5%; Other/Undecided: 12.3%. Survey Results Question 1: To what extent should the news media present stories about war and peace, homeland security, the economy, unethical or illegal actions, and good deeds by people or companies? The stories surveyed for reflect those receiving the most media coverage, or registering high interest in public opinion polls. Respondents felt strongly that the news media should cover each story surveyed for. They prioritized stories about the economy, war and peace, and homeland security. To a lesser but still strong extent, they felt that stories regarding ethical and unethical behavior should be covered. Interest in stories about good deeds was even stronger than interest in stories about unethical or illegal actions. Table 1: Extent News Media Should Present Each Story Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean War and peace 3.0 25.1 71.9 4.04 Homeland security 11.4 25.2 63.4 3.77 The economy 2.5 12.8 84.7 4.27 Unethical or illegal action by people or companies 15.2 29.2 54.9 3.58 Good deeds by people or companies 11.7 30.2 58.0 3.74 Question 2: To what extent did/do you follow media coverage of the D.C. sniper, disarming Iraq (note: survey was conducted in February 2003, two months before the 2003 War with Iraq began), U.S. 2002 elections, and corporate scandals? To what extent do you understand each story? All stories surveyed for received high media coverage, were relatively long-running stories, and had some element of “drama.” Only coverage of the D.C. sniper was followed highly by respondents, and the D.C. sniper story is the only story surveyed for that respondents understood highly. Disarming Iraq was both followed and understood second most highly. Following and understanding of corporate scandals ranked a relatively moderate third, with following and understanding of the most recent U.S. elections – the most “routine” of the stories surveyed for – ranked a relatively distant fourth. Table 2: Extent Respondents Followed Each Story and Understood Each Story Followed Understood Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean D.C. sniper 16.8 26.2 57.1 3.59 10.7 19.3 70.1 3.91 Disarming Iraq 24.6 27.8 47.6 3.34 23.2 37.9 38.9 3.26 U.S. 2002 elections 41.1 28.9 30.0 2.84 33.2 32.1 34.7 3.08 Corporate scandals 30.2 34.4 35.4 3.06 26.8 36.8 36.3 3.18 Question 3: To what extent do you consider actions by Iraq, North Korea, Enron, Arthur Andersen, and Martha Stewart to be ethical? All stories surveyed for received high media coverage, and all had an ethical component. Respondents on the whole considered each of the actions surveyed for to be less than ethical; none received a mean greater than 3 on the scale of 1-5 used. Corporate scandals were reported to be the least ethical, with almost three out of four respondents finding Arthur Andersen’s shredding of accounting documents to be highly unethical, and Enron executives’ inflating financial performance felt to be only slightly less unethical. Some two-thirds of the respondents considered Martha Stewart’s alleged insider trading to be highly unethical. Opinion was somewhat more mixed regarding North Korea’s resumption of nuclear armament. Only Hussein’s actions regarding U.N. weapon inspection of Iraq was not seen by a majority of respondents to be highly unethical (note: the survey was conducted in February 2003, two months before the 2003 War with Iraq began). Table 3: Extent Respondents Considered Each To Be Ethical Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean Hussein/Iraq re: UN weapon inspection 40.2 19.0 40.8 2.92 North Korea re: resuming nuclear armament 54.8 23.5 21.7 2.40 Enron executives re: inflating financial performance 70.2 9.6 20.2 2.07 Arthur Andersen re: shredding accounting documents 73.8 11.0 15.2 1.91 Martha Stewart re: inside trading 65.6 18.9 15.6 2.17 Question 4: To what extent must business actions achieve net gain (utility), fair play (rights), or fair share (justice) to be ethical (ethical criteria based on Post, 2002)? Respondents considered an ethical business action to be one that highly achieves all three factors surveyed for. Of these, fair play was prioritized, fair share was second, and net gain was considered to be third most important. Table 4: Extent a Business Action Must Achieve Each To Be Ethical Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean Net gain (utility): benefits of action are greater than costs 15.5 32.5 52.0 3.49 Fair play (rights): rights of all involved are respected 5.9 14.9 79.2 4.20 Fair share (justice): costs/benefits are equally borne by all affected 9.0 28.0 63.0 3.80 Question 5: To what extent does personal gain, competitive pressure, clash of business with personal values, or cross-cultural factors cause ethical problems in business (ethical problem causality criteria based on Post, 2002)? Respondents solidly considered personal gain/selfish interest, competitive pressure on profit, and clash between business goals with personal values to be strong sources of ethical problems – in that order, ranked most to least. Cross-cultural contradiction was the only factor surveyed for that a majority of respondents did not consider a leading cause of ethical problems at work. Table 5: Extent Each Is a Cause of Ethical Problems in Business Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean Personal gain and selfish interest (“I want it”) 4.9 9.8 85.3 4.31 Competitive pressure on profit (“We must beat others at all cost”) 6.4 17.6 76.0 3.97 Business goals vs. personal values (“Do as I say or else”) 10.8 25.1 64.0 3.75 Cross-cultural contradictions (“Their idea of what’s right is odd”) 27.9 36.3 35.8 3.14 Question 6: To what extent should policy and procedure, personal opinion, society’s traditions, the period of time in history, or special circumstances be applied when making business decisions (ethical relativism criteria based on Post, 2002)? Respondents considered it most important to apply policy and procedure when making business decisions, with the majority also considering it highly important to take special circumstances into account. Period of time and society’s tradition were felt to be of more moderate importance. Personal opinion was considered to be least important and was relatively devalued by respondents as a decision-making element. Table 6: Extent Each Should Be Applied When Making Business Decision Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean Policy and procedure (“It is right since it follows the rules”) 7.8 24.4 67.8 3.87 Personal opinion (“It is believed to be right by me”) 35.6 33.7 30.7 2.93 Society’s traditions (“It is believed to be right here”) 23.0 39.2 37.7 3.17 Period of time in history (“It is believed to be right now”) 22.5 36.8 40.7 3.23 Special circumstances (“It is believed to be right in this case”) 13.8 28.6 57.6 3.64 Question 7: To what extent have your attitudes toward business ethics been shaped by work experience, college classes, family and friends, or high visibility examples of ethical and unethical business behavior presented by the media (moral development/socialization criteria based on Post, 2002)? A majority of respondents reported all factors surveyed for to have been highly important in shaping their attitudes toward business ethics. More than two out of three considered their work experience to be strongly influential, with family and friends to have been highly formative also. Highly visible examples of ethical or unethical behavior presented by the media was ranked third, with college classes ranked slightly behind and fourth in attitudinal impact. Table 7: Extent Respondent’s Attitudes Have Been Shaped by Each Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean Work experience 12.7 18.6 68.6 3.75 College classes 14.8 35.0 50.2 3.48 Family and friends 16.1 21.0 62.9 3.71 Highly visible example of ethical/unethical behavior told by media 23.5 25.0 51.5 3.39 Question 8: To what extent is ethical business action important? Respondents were in strong agreement. Some nine out of ten considered ethical business action to be highly important. Table 8: Extent Ethical Business Action Is Important Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) %1-2 %3 %4-5 Mean 2.1 8.0 89.8 4.44 Question 9: Have high visibility examples of unethical business behavior presented by the media changed your choice of academic major or career? Respondents were again in strong agreement. Most reported that both their choice of academic major and choice of career have been unaffected by media-portrayed examples of unethical business behavior. Table 9: Effect of Media-Told Highly Visible Examples of Unethical Business Behavior on Choice Response scale: 1 (low) – 5 (high) % Yes % No Changed choice of academic major 7.9 92.1 Changed choice of career 11.1 88.9 Question 10: How have your opinions and behavior regarding work been affected by high visibility examples of unethical business behavior? A majority of respondents reported that their respect for business employees, their ethical behavior at work, their trust for others at work, and their respect for the media have been unchanged by media-portrayed examples of unethical business behavior – in that order, ranked most to least unchanged. Respect for business executives has experienced the greatest loss, followed closely by the extent to which business behavior is considered to be ethical. The factor experiencing the greatest gain was tendency to behave more ethically at work, with some one out of four respondents registering that tendency. Table 10: Impact of Media-Told Highly Visible Examples of Unethical Business Behavior on Attitude Scale: 1 (more), 2 (no change), 3 (less) % More now % No change % Lessnow Think business behavior is more or less ethical than used to 16.2 40.3 42.9 Respect business executives more or less than used to 5.2 49.2 45.0 Respect business employees more or less than used to 13.1 72.8 14.1 Respect the media more or less than used to 5.8 58.6 35.6 Behave more or less ethically at work than used to 27.7 70.7 1.6 Trust others at work more or less than used to 5.2 64.9 29.8 Question 11: How have your academic and career choices been affected by high visibility examples of unethical business behavior (factors surveyed for reflect majors, coursework, and alternate career options most closely relevant to the examples surveyed for)? The majority of respondents reported no change in their likeliness to major in accounting, finance, management, or marketing. The majority also stated no change in their likeliness to seek out coursework in business ethics, business laws, or public/media relations. Additionally, the majority saw no change in their likeliness to pursue a law degree after college, or to pursue a career in non-profit or public service. The areas projecting the greatest potential losses were accounting, finance, and non-profit or public service. The areas projecting the greatest potential gains were courses in business law, courses or cases in business ethics, courses in public/media relations, and the major in management. Table 11: Effect of Media-Told Highly Visible Examples of Unethical Behavior on Likelihood Scale: 1 (more likely), 2 (no change),3 (less likely) % More likely to now % No change in likeliness to % Less likely to now Major in accounting 11.3 58.8 29.9 Major in finance 12.3 60.1 27.6 Major in management 23.3 64.4 12.4 Major in marketing 15.5 70.5 14.0 Seek out courses or cases in business ethics 31.3 59.7 9.0 Seek out courses in business law 33.7 55.9 10.4 Seek out courses in public/media relations 22.0 65.5 12.5 Purse law degree after college 15.3 64.5 20.2 Pursue career in non-profit or public service 10.3 66.0 23.6 Respondent Comments Open-ended comments were invited at the end of the questionnaire. Responses follow: · I discount the media for the most part. They twist all stories so they sell. Hyperinflation of certain truths is not ethical on their part. · Business is good, but trust is very important in business. · These executives face mere slaps on the wrists for the crimes they perpetuated against the American and international community. They have shaken the foundation of all markets, and should spend plenty of time in a jail like Ricker’s Island. · The media should continue informing us as it will help our decisions in buying stocks. · I think the media cover business behavior as long as it is still cheap to report about it, so I pay very little attention to what is reported regarding business behavior. · I do not think enough stories are presented about the young urban hometown business people who were able to achieve a lot, especially in urban areas. · I dislike the disproportionate amount of attention given to every hint of business misbehavior following the Enron case, even if the companies or individuals did nothing rotten. I feel they needed scapegoats for the poor performance of the economy and the media highly overplayed it. · Businesses have always been unethical; these days the media just make a bigger deal out of it. Comparative Responses To help determine whether the responses of Ramapo College students were consistent with those of other students, an additional 28 undergraduate students were surveyed in business school classes at Fordham University, a private four-year college in New York City. Their demographics were more male and more accounting major than those of the Ramapo College (RC) cohort whose responses were detailed above. Additionally, a focus group of four students from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University (KSG) responded to the survey questions. They were older than both Ramapo College and Fordham University (FU) respondents, all female, all graduate students, and all non-business students. Overall, comparison of the responses between those sampled at these three institutions suggest that the survey results presented above are reflective of attitudes of business students elsewhere. This is underscored when noting the few differences that did appear among the three institutions surveyed. RC and FU respondents are enrolled in undergraduate business classes. KSG respondents are non-business school students enrolled in a graduate program training them for non-profit public/government service. Differences in responses between samples are consistent with the differences in their career orientations, as follow: · Question 2: KSG respondents followed and understood the most recent U.S. elections significantly more than did RC or FU respondents. · Question 3: KSG respondents found all three examples of unethical corporate behavior far less ethical than did RC or FU respondents. · Question 4: All three sampled groups prioritized the impact of the three factors determining ethical behavior in the same order. However, the three samples differed regarding the extent to which ethical business action must achieve utility/net gain. RC respondents reported utility/net gain more important than did FU respondents, who reported it much more important than did KSG respondents. On the other hand, KSG respondents thought fair play a much more important ethical determinant than either RC or FU respondents, and considered it the most important ethical determinant of factors surveyed for. · Question 5: KSG respondents found a clash between business goals and personal values to be a much greater cause of ethical problems than did RC or FU respondents. · Question 6: KSG respondents found special circumstances much less legitimate as a decision-making factor than did RC or FU respondents · Question 7: KSG respondents (who have probably had fewer business school classes than RC or FU respondents) found college classes much less influential than RC or FU respondents in having shaped their attitudes toward business ethics, and family and friends to have been more influential than other respondents. · Question 10: KSG respondents now think business to be less ethical than they used to, and respect business executives less than they used to. Both of these reductions (perception of business as ethical, and respect for business executives) were significantly greater among KSG respondents than among RC or FU respondents. FU respondents have lost considerably more respect for both business executives and business employees than have RC respondents, while RC respondents have lost considerably more respect for media when compared with FU respondents. This may suggest a somewhat more idealistic view of business and a more cynical view of media by RC students. Summary of Findings In presenting a Chronicle of Higher Education annual survey of freshmen in the U.S., the correlation between high visibility events and student attitudes was described this way: “Societal events affect students’ views of what’s important to them, along with their own personal assessments” (Bartlett, 2002). A survey of 27 U.S. campuses conducted by Students in Free Enterprise found 84% of respondents believing that the U.S. is having a business crisis, and 77% thinking that CEOs should be held personally responsible for that crisis (Weisul, 2002). The results of the study conducted for this paper are all the more interesting to consider, within that context. Business students appear to support the presentation of stories that the media prioritize, and to feel it even more important that stories about “good deeds” be told than stories about “bad deeds.” They tend to follow major stories in the same order in which they understand them, and their relatively moderate to low levels of following media stories is consistent with patterns reported by the Pew Research Center. Of particular note is the only moderate level at which business school students follow media-presented stories of corporate scandals, and understand such stories. At the same time, they strongly believe the actions presented in these stories to be highly unethical. The ethical attitudes reported by business students conform on the whole to those identified as important by Post/Lawrence/Weber (Post, 2002), and virtually all respondents report ethical business action to be important. Graduate student respondents preparing for careers in non-profit public service (KSG respondents) find recent corporate scandals far less ethical than do business school respondents. Most respondents report their academic and career choices to be unaffected by media-presented examples of unethical business behavior. Business majors in accounting and finance appear most vulnerable to loss, while the management major and courses in business law, ethics, public/media relations appear to be in a position to gain most. Nexus Business and journalism schools preparing students for careers in media management or business reporting may find these results of particular interest. A study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press finds journalists reporting that widespread public criticism of journalism is valid. The journalists surveyed find television journalism, the primary source of news for most people, to be even more problematic than newspaper journalism. Specifically, the journalists report that competitive and financial pressures have entwined television news shows with entertainment, that the distinction between reporting and commentary has seriously eroded, that factual errors in reporting are frequent, and that the press drives controversies more than it only reports the facts (Striking the Balance, 1999). A recent article summarize these practices by describing business journalism as tending toward “salesmanship,” and includes that – along with similar trends in investment banking and political power – as a contributing factor in “the wreck of Enron” (Shocked, 2002). One corollary of such practices may well be in the nexus between the business of media, the corporations whose stories the media presents, and the many media consumers who are preparing themselves for careers in business. Findings of this study suggest that media, corporations, and business students may all be better served if media examples of high visibility behavior would be portrayed journalistically – with a focus on facts, objectivity, and accuracy – and in a way viewers can understand and want to follow more. That may include presenting more examples of positive behavior. Further, if cross-cultural factors, the period of time in history, a society’s traditions, or personal opinions are affecting business behavior, findings of this study suggest that the media should convey that, as respondents seem to be least aware of those influences. Noted linguist Deborah Tannen has postulated that one result of today’s media practices may be a media consumer who sees the world “passively.” Such a consumer begins to see unfolding events as if they were a television show; if one does not like the “news,” one flips the channel. Reality becomes de- personalized. It becomes something about which one decides whether or not to watch – not whether or not to take action about. Such views may help to explain the apparently strong rejection of unethical business behavior by survey respondents, while their commitment to business careers remains largely unchanged. Tannen’s perceptions would suggest that survey respondents may disconnect themselves from the stories of unethical business behavior portrayed by media, even though they are preparing themselves for business careers. They may impersonally observe highly visible unethical business behavior, apply their own ethical norms to such behavior, and conclude that particular institutions and individuals are unethical. They may generalize from that abstraction to develop a loss of respect for business executives, and to reduce expectations that business behavior overall is ethical. But they may then “compartmentalize,” and not extend those generalization to the “local, real” arena in which they themselves are active participants. Their trust and behavior toward those with and for whom they work, and their own career choices, appear to be largely exempt from those generalizations. Implications for Future Research Survey results reported in this paper suggest that undergraduate business students aspire toward ethical business behavior, and are open to courses that will help them achieve it. These attitudes are consistent with AACSB accreditation standards, which include ethics among required curricular components for undergraduate and graduate business programs (AACSB, 2003). At the same time, the Aspen Institute’s “Student Attitudes Survey” reports that MBA students find ethical conflicts stressful, do not expect to be able to change the culture of companies where they work, and as a result are ready to quit when faced with significant ethical dilemmas at work (2002). There may be a pivotal teaching opportunity, then, as undergraduate students preparing for positions of business leadership move into graduate business programs. Ethical attitudes of these students appear to be intact. Would additional training in preventing and managing ethical dilemmas, resolving conflict, and changing culture resolute in more ethical business behavior? A subsequent article will explore these questions. It will be rooted in this paper, as effective teaching begins with understanding the frames of reference of those being taught. References · _____, “Accreditation Standards: Curriculum Content and Evaluation,” AACSB, retrieved online Feb. 22, 2003. · _____, “ Public’s News Habits Little Changed by September 11,” Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, June 9, 2002. · _____, “Shocked, Shocked! Enronian Myths Exposed,” Nation, Apr. 8, 2002. · _____, “Striking the Balance: Audience Interests, Business Pressures, and Journalists’ Values,” Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, March 30, 1999. · _____, “Student Attitudes Survey,” The Aspen Institute, 2002. References, Continued · _____, “The Top Ten News Stories of 2002,” World Almanac and Book of Facts, 2003. · Bartlett, Thomas, “Evaluating Student Attitudes Is More Difficult This Year,” Chronicle of Higher Education, Feb. 1, 2002. · Carter, “TV Networks Plan Flood of Reality for Summer,” The New York Times, Feb. 24, 2002. · Hall, Jane, “Cable: Flying High,” Columbia Journalism Review, January/February 2001. · Iorio, Sharon, “When Scandal Is the Story,” Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 1999. · Johnson, “For Cable News, Iraq Is a Clear Victory,” USA Today, Apr. 9, 2003. · Kelly, James, “The Year of the Whistle-Blowers,” Time, December 30, 2002 – January 6, 2003. · Loomis, Tamara, “Scandals Rock Juror Attitudes,” National Law Journal, Oct. 21, 2002. · Mangan, Katherine, “The Ethics of Business Schools,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Sept. 20, 2002. · Matthews, Chris, The Chris Matthews Show, Feb. 23, 2003. · Merritt, Jennifer, “For MBAs, Soul-Searching 101,” Business Week, Sept. 16, 2002. · Newport, Frank, “Republicans More Likely Than Democrats to Use Talk Radio for News,” Gallup News Service, Jan. 6, 2003. · Post, James, Lawrence, Anne, and Weber, James, Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics, 10 ed., McGraw-Hill, 2002. · Prentice, Robert, “An Ethics Lesson for Business Schools,” The New York Times, Aug. 20, 2002. · Weisul, Kimberly, and Merritt, Jennifer, “You Mean Cheating Is Wrong?” Business Week, Dec. 9, 2002. |
|