IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v8y2020i3p101-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technologies, Ethics and Journalism’s Relationship with the Public

Author

Listed:
  • Megan Duncan

    (Department of Communication, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA)

  • Kathleen Bartzen Culver

    (School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Wisconsin, USA)

Abstract

Drones can provide a bird’s eye view of breaking news and events that can be streamed live or used in edited news coverage. Past research has focused on the training and ethics of journalists and drone operators. Little attention, however, has been given to audiences and their acceptance and perception of ethics. We suggest that audiences who are open to personal technology use will perceive news media using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) as more ethical in an extension of the Diffusion of Innovation Theory. In a survey (N = 548) of adults living in the United States, we explore the correlates between trust, technology, privacy, and the use of UAVs. Results suggest all three are positively correlated with openness toward drone journalism. We find the audience has preferences for the types of news stories that should be covered using drones. Participants indicated they welcome drone journalism when covering traffic and investigative stories, but not celebrities and politicians. The findings have implications for newsrooms, suggesting transparency and outreach to educate people on the technology could help build trust. Further, the results suggest that Diffusion of Innovation theory can be applied when mediated through news media.

Suggested Citation

  • Megan Duncan & Kathleen Bartzen Culver, 2020. "Technologies, Ethics and Journalism’s Relationship with the Public," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 101-111.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v:8:y:2020:i:3:p:101-111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/3039
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & James Agarwal, 2004. "Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 336-355, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jonas Harvard & Mats Hyvönen & Ingela Wadbring, 2020. "Journalism from Above: Drones and the Media in Critical Perspective," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 60-63.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cheng, Junjun & Chen, Bo & Huang, Zihang, 2023. "Collective-based ad transparency in targeted hotel advertising: Consumers’ regulatory focus underlying the crowd safety effect," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Potoglou, Dimitris & Palacios, Juan & Feijoo, Claudio & Gómez Barroso, Jose-Luis, 2015. "The supply of personal information: A study on the determinants of information provision in e-commerce scenarios," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127174, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    3. Morosan, Cristian, 2016. "An empirical examination of U.S. travelers’ intentions to use biometric e-gates in airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 120-128.
    4. Corey Angst, 2009. "Protect My Privacy or Support the Common-Good? Ethical Questions About Electronic Health Information Exchanges," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 169-178, November.
    5. Huarng, Kun-Huang & Yu, Tiffany Hui-Kuang & Lee, Cheng fang, 2022. "Adoption model of healthcare wearable devices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Mario Silic & Andrea Back, 2016. "The Influence of Risk Factors in Decision-Making Process for Open Source Software Adoption," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 151-185, January.
    7. Angeliki Kitsiou & Charikleia Despotidi & Christos Kalloniatis & Stefanos Gritzalis, 2022. "The Role of Users’ Demographic and Social Attributes for Accepting Biometric Systems: A Greek Case Study," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-31, November.
    8. Meents, S. & Verhagen, T. & Vlaar, P.W.L., 2011. "How sellers can stimulate purchasing in electronic marketplaces: Using information as a risk reduction signal," Serie Research Memoranda 0014, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    9. Zhenhui (Jack) Jiang & Cheng Suang Heng & Ben C. F. Choi, 2013. "Research Note —Privacy Concerns and Privacy-Protective Behavior in Synchronous Online Social Interactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 579-595, September.
    10. Erdem Özkan, 2018. "Why Do Consumers Behave Differently in Personal Information Disclosure and Self-Disclosure? The Role of Personality Traits and Privacy Concern," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 6(2), pages 257-276, December.
    11. David Harborth & Sebastian Pape, 2020. "Empirically Investigating Extraneous Influences on the “APCO” Model—Childhood Brand Nostalgia and the Positivity Bias," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Yi Sun & Shihui Li & Lingling Yu, 2022. "The dark sides of AI personal assistant: effects of service failure on user continuance intention," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 17-39, March.
    13. Chetan A. Jhaveri & Jitendra M. Nenavani, 2020. "Evaluation of eTail Services Quality: AHP Approach," Vision, , vol. 24(3), pages 310-319, September.
    14. Saridakis, George & Benson, Vladlena & Ezingeard, Jean-Noel & Tennakoon, Hemamali, 2016. "Individual information security, user behaviour and cyber victimisation: An empirical study of social networking users," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 320-330.
    15. Raouf Jaziri & Mohammad Miralam, 2019. "Modelling the crowdfunding technology adoption among novice entrepreneurs: an extended tam model," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(4), pages 2159-2179, June.
    16. Faqih, Khaled M.S., 2016. "An empirical analysis of factors predicting the behavioral intention to adopt Internet shopping technology among non-shoppers in a developing country context: Does gender matter?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 140-164.
    17. Grace Fox & Lisa van der Werff & Pierangelo Rosati & Patricia Takako Endo & Theo Lynn, 2022. "Examining the determinants of acceptance and use of mobile contact tracing applications in Brazil: An extended privacy calculus perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(7), pages 944-967, July.
    18. Tajvidi, Mina & Richard, Marie-Odile & Wang, YiChuan & Hajli, Nick, 2020. "Brand co-creation through social commerce information sharing: The role of social media," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 476-486.
    19. Cheah, Jun-Hwa & Lim, Xin-Jean & Ting, Hiram & Liu, Yide & Quach, Sara, 2022. "Are privacy concerns still relevant? Revisiting consumer behaviour in omnichannel retailing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    20. Chen, Xiaogang & Ma, Jing & Jin, Jiafei & Fosh, Patricia, 2013. "Information privacy, gender differences, and intrinsic motivation in the workplace," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 917-926.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v:8:y:2020:i:3:p:101-111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.