Media Ethics Basics

Overview

This is lesson 1 of 16 in “Ethics in Media Exploration”. Students will define media ethics, identify ethical dilemmas media professionals face, and practise explaining why ethics matters for individuals and society.

Learning intentions

Students will be able to:

• WALT define “media ethics” using simple examples
• WALT describe features of an ethical issue in a media context
• WALT compare different viewpoints about an ethical dilemma
• WALT explain how media choices can affect society

Success criteria

I can:

• clearly define media ethics and give at least one real-world example
• describe an ethical issue in the media (key features, context, and points of view)
• explain possible effects of the issue on audiences and society using evidence from the case
• use respectful discussion language when considering different perspectives

Curriculum links

• Social Sciences: Media Studies — learning focus on ethical issues in media contexts and their effects
• NCEA AS91254 (Demonstrate understanding of an ethical issue in the media): describes features, context, points of view, and effects
• Key competencies: Thinking (reasoning from evidence), Communicating (presenting viewpoints), Participating and contributing (respectful dialogue)
• Values: Integrity and respect through examining fairness, responsibility, and impacts of media decisions

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–7 min · Starter: “Ethics in 30 seconds”. Teacher displays two short prompts (e.g., “Should a shocking image be published?” “Should a source be anonymised?”) and asks students to write one sentence on what “ethics” means to them. Students write independently, then share one idea with a partner.

2. 7–18 min · Direct teach: What counts as media ethics? Teacher builds a class definition: media ethics are principles that guide fair, accurate, responsible media decisions about what gets shown, said, or left out and why. Teacher links to common ethical areas (privacy, accuracy, fairness, protection of children). Students record a “working definition” and a simple list of ethical areas, then answer two quick checks verbally.

3. 18–32 min · Model case: Ethical dilemma mini-brief. Teacher provides a scenario (choose one that suits your school/community): a news story uses an identifiable photo of a minor; or a social media page edits a clip to make a person look guilty. Teacher models the thinking process: identify the ethical issue, context, who is affected, and possible viewpoints (e.g., right to information vs privacy; public interest vs harm). Students complete a one-page “Case Notes” organiser in pairs:

• What is the ethical issue? (1–2 sentences)
• Context: where/when/why does it happen?
• Points of view: at least two different perspectives
• Possible effects: 2–3 impacts on audience/society

4. 32–48 min · Structured discussion: Viewpoint line. Teacher sets up four corners or a “continuum” in the room: strongly agree / agree / disagree / strongly disagree with a statement such as “Media should publish any information that interests the public.” Students stand, then take turns explaining their position using sentence stems (e.g., “I think this because…”, “A different viewpoint is…”, “The effect could be…”). Teacher prompts students to include effects on society, not only personal preference.

5. 48–56 min · Practise: Turn notes into an “ethics explanation”. Teacher provides a short example paragraph and highlights what makes it clear and reasoned (linking evidence from the case to claims about effects). Students write a 6–8 sentence explanation individually answering:

• What ethical issue is present?
• What are the competing viewpoints?
• Why might this issue exist?
• What are likely consequences for media and/or society?

6. 56–60 min · Exit ticket. Teacher collects an exit ticket with two prompts:

• Define media ethics in one sentence.
• Name one ethical principle (e.g., fairness, privacy, accuracy) and link it to the case.

Resources

• Printed “Case Notes” organiser for each student
• One teacher case brief (printed or projected)
• Continuum cards or corner labels for the room
• Sentence stems for discussion
• Exit ticket slips
• Timer (visible to class)

Assessment

• Formative: monitor pair work during “Case Notes” for accurate identification of issue, context, points of view, and effects
• Formative: teacher checks discussion quality using a quick checklist (evidence-based claims, respectful listening, includes effects)
• Exit ticket to gauge readiness for deeper “in-depth” reasoning in later lessons linked to NCEA AS91254

Differentiation

• Support: provide sentence starters, a model paragraph, and a “word bank” of ethical terms (privacy, accuracy, fairness, protection of children, censorship/self-censorship)
• Support: allow students to choose between two case options if one feels more accessible
• Extension: challenge students to add a third perspective (e.g., regulator, platform, audience member, the person harmed) and identify a likely unintended consequence
• EAL/SEN: offer graphic organiser focus (boxes to fill) and allow oral responses to be recorded by a partner before writing

Extension (optional)

• Not included.