Deception is the act of deceiving and to deceive is to be false, so when we say someone is using deception in their story in their investigative reporting they are, or are they? Journalist everywhere has an opinion on this hot topic and it has't to be an old-aged topic among journalists. You’re going undercover and you end up finding really important revealing information and it may bring justice, or it may not. The information may bring the truth to the American people and isn't that what we want anyway? To know the truth behind a situation to know our journalists are being truthful to us and working the hardest to bring us the truth, so we're not blindsided.

    When considering using deception in your story you can get and use multiple guidelines that other journalists have wrote, so you know what to do when using deception. When thinking of it though sometimes you can't get the information you want, or need unless you go undercover. Still you have people who are totally against it and think it's morally wrong, but for a story to be deemed okay deception must be the only thing that he/ or she as a journalist could do. Now there's a new prescriptive in this whole deception thing. So the people who just did deception are really being deceiving and others who did are because they had no other way to find the information out?

  What Would You Do? Is a telly show that broadcasts on ABC network and the show picks hot topics for actors to stage a scenario concerning that hot topic like a lesbian couple in Texas with kids and very verbal waitress. You get reactions from everyday people and then after a while the telly crew and the host John Quinones introduces him and the show etc. Deception? Not deception? How else would they get people’s reactions when people know the telly crew is there in the restaurant? You wouldn't get a southern man to thumbs up the waitress for kicking out a married gay couple and their kids because he doesn't want that televised so his friends maybe co-workers can see, his reputation would be damaged and he wouldn't want that, no one does.

    In newspapers you have to tell the absolute truth, or else it's called unethical journalism, or you were fabricating with information. This makes sense because the newspaper is local and you don't people going around not thinking the truth about someting because then bad things could come of that. The Star Tribune you have people every day here in Minnesota reading it about the news in the Twin Cities and around world at the same time. Then you have more political newspapers like the New York Times where you have a larger number of people reading that paper, but you can also follow both of these on Twitter so you get an even bigger audience. People reading the newspaper are going to be getting information about what's going locally in there city, town, or state and they read big stories that are in the headlines too about politics, for example during election time you always have stories on the candidates, and as a person who is voting you want to know the true specifics behind their plans for the country because your living in this country.

    Deception is a hard thing to absoutly know if it's ok or not to me, you got to think about it for awhile. Does it make sense for one to decieve people because they want raw hardcore investagative reporting? For the telly, are they just trying to make it entertainment for people at home, and trying to get views for the network? To me deception and using it is sketching because if you catch someone in deception they could make an excuse as to why they're using it and say the right thing instead of the ugly truth and sometimes you can hurt people with deception.