Here is a slideshow on a case study in Media Ethics regarding Bob Costas and his famous Jerry Sandusky interview

1. Case Study 10B
Bob Costas and Jerry Sandusky: Is Sports Entertainment or
Journalism

2. Who is Jerry Sandusky?
● 3 year starter at Penn State as a defensive end from 1963-1965
● Defensive coordinator at Penn State University under Head Coach Joe Paterno
from 1969-1999. Assistant Coach of the year winner 1986,1999
● Author of multiple books
● Founder of Second Mile Charity organization, serving Pennsylvania's
underprivileged youth.
● Husband and Father of six adopted children
● Convicted Serial Rapist and child molestor in 2012

3. What happened
In 2011 Sandusky was accused of and arrested on charges of child molestation.
In the years before his fall, Sandusky was the assistant coach to the winningest coach in college football, Joe
Paterno. To put things in perspective, if college football was a comic than Paterno and Sandusky were Batman
and Robin, Penn state was Gotham. Together they were honored and respected as a staple of PSU.
When Sandusky was being investigated it was discovered that he used his charity the Second Mile foundation
to recruit his victims. Often using his access to the University’s football facilities as a way to lure young boys.
Former FBI director, Louis Freeh’s investigation found that Paterno knew about his assistance misconduct, and
urged the University not to take action.

4. The outcome
The great reputation Penn State University was smeared.
Joe Paterno died during the investigation looking like an accomplice to child
molestation.
Jerry Sandusky was convicted for 45 of the 48 counts of sexual abuse and sentenced to
30-60 years in prison, essentially a life sentence.
The nation debated the ethical responsibilities of reporting suspicions of sexual abuse
to children.
Sports Journalist, Bob Costas received an emmy nomination for his interview with
Jerry Sandusky.

5. Why mention Bob Costas?
Bob Costas is one of the biggest names in his field of Sports Journalism, which differs
from classic journalism because of its profitability and importance to everyone it
involves.
Costas interviewed Sandusky right before his trial. The interview lasted 38 minutes, 8
of which were televised on NBC’s primetime segment called “Rock Center with Brian
Williams.
The interview shed light on the full extent of the scandal. Including an admission from
Sandusky that he “horsed around” with young boys. The questions from Costas were
direct and confrontational.

6. The Controversy
NBC and Costas were criticised for their editing of the interview. Specifically for a
portion that was not discovered until it was subpoenaed during trial in which
Sandusky nearly admits his guilt.
19:00:28:00 But isn’t what you’re just describing the classic MO of many pedophiles? And that is that they gain the trust of young people, they don’t necessarily abuse every young person. There
were hundreds, if not thousands of young boys you came into contact with, but there are allegations that at least eight of them were victimized. Many people believe there are more to come. So it’s
entirely possible that you could’ve helped young boy A in some way that was not objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boys B, C, D, and E. Isn’t that possible?
JERRY SANDUSKY:19:01:01:00 Well—you might think that. I don’t know. (LAUGHS) In terms of— my relationship with so many, many young people, I would—I would guess that there are many
young people who would come forward. Many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and—and what I had done for them made a very positive impact on their
life. And I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped. There are many that I didn’thave—I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many
ways.
So theres questions, Should the omitted part of the interview have aired along with the rest of the broadcast? And Was it wrong to
edit that part out since it seems Sandusky admits his guilt?

7. Ethical codes
NBC seemed to somewhat protected Sandusky by choosing to omit part of the
interview. That does not align with the expectation to protect abusers and to prosecute
abusers of vulnerable subjects.
Society of Professional Journalism: - Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. Give voice to the voiceless
- Recognize a special obligation to serve as watchdogs over public affairs and government. Seek to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in the
open, and that public records are open to all.
- Provide access to source material when it is relevant and appropriate
- Never deliberately distort facts or context, including visual
- Provide context: take special care not to over complicate or oversimplify.
- Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work.
-Balance a subject's right to a fair trial with the public's right to know
Radio Television Digital News Association: - Determine news content solely through editorial judgment and not as the result of
outside influence.
- Refuse to allow the interests of ownership or management to influence news judgment and content inappropriately.

8. The issues
● Bob Costas is a sports journalist, not an investigative journalist. This is a sports
related issue but has an impact on society as a whole.
● It is the job of the investigative reporter is to report the facts and have the subject
respond, but not infer or imply the subject is automatically innocent or guilty.
● The question Costas asked was phrased very deceptively. He asked if it was
possible that a hypothetical situation happened. Sandusky nearly admits but the
admission would have been up to interpretation, even though the court of public
opinion would have surely found him guilty.

9. Courses of action
Omit the section: NBC had time restraints for material, and effectively let the public
hear Sandusky’s poor job of defending himself in the portion that was released. Earlier
in the interview Sandusky denied the straightforward question that asked if he was a
pedophile. Than when a difficulty phrased question was asked he gave a poorly
worded answer that had the possibility of admitting guilt. NBC could have made the
man guilty in the public's eye before he ever went to trial and decided not to.
Run it: Reporters have a moral obligation to share the truth. Though the questions
were tough, Sandusky said what he said on the record. And if he was admitting to guilt
and they did not share it, what makes NBC any different than those like Paterno who
knew and said nothing?

10. Avoiding this delima
If an investigative journalist had covered this issue than they would have been more
aware the proper way to provide context and provide legally safe questions that would
not create a dilemma like this.
The decision to have Costas rather than an investigative journalist is talked about in
chapter 10. The combination of art (entertainment) and news meant that it was
evident that the public would admire a sports reporter talking with the former coach,
even though the topic was not necessarily sports related.

11. The ethical Decision
Kant's Categorical Imperative: Act so your choices could be universal law; treat
humanity as an end, never as a means.
Had Sandusky said “yes I am a pedophile,” than there would be no speculation and it
would have been truth. An accepted universal law is that the public should know the
truth.
The omitted portion that people say he might have admitted was a deceptive question,
which would have undermined Sandusky’s right to a fair trial.
I believe that Kant's philosophy would have supported their decision to omit that part
so that the man, as well as the public would not be impacted by a statement thats
meaning depended on reading between the line.

12. Taking a step back
When reevaluating the possible courses of action through the lens of Kant it is
important to remember this was before the trial.
Had they ran the last part of the interview, the majority of people would have said that
he was guilty. But if his trial verdict turned out he was innocent, the mans image
would have permanently been affected no matter his trial.
By omitting this part the public never really missed out on any truth. They heard his
accusations, his denial, as well as the creepy persona the man undeniably had. And his
guilt was indisputably confirmed shortly after through the court of law.
I believe they made the ethical decision based on Kant's philosophy.

13. The interview and suggested readings
The interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmoO5Ul0OBI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Sandusky
https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
http://stelliott14.blogspot.com/2016/02/case-study-blog-3.html
https://deadspin.com/5919340/did-jerry-sandusky-admit-his-guilt-to-bob-costas-in-
portion-of-interview-nbc-never-aired
Patterson, Philip, Wilkins, Lee. Media Ethics: Issues and Cases, 8th Edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 01/2014. [Chegg].