Abstract

The centuries-old lost War Doctrine can be a model for framing the journalistic ethics decision making process - a Just Journalism moral test of intended action against anticipated effects. A just journalism paradigm provides a clear set of criteria to be argued and met in considering action that approaches or crosses such borders of extreme professional practice as deception or intrusions into personal privacy. The debate provides a sharper focus on the effects of actions through balancing intentions, justice, methods, alternatives - and on who should be involved. This article develops a lust Journalism Doctrine by translating Just War criteria into journalistic counterparts. A discussion shows how the criteria can be applied to deception and in evaluating the moral fit of naming of both accused and accuser in a rape case.