We’re Introductory Journalism students at Kean University in Union, New Jersey.
Now that we’ve learned the logistics of journalism, we’ve launched into the real deal. Our blog is all ours. We’ll bring you newsworthy topics of interest to college students in New Jersey.
So we’ve planted this journalistic seed — help it to grow. Give us a read. And we want your feedback. Post thoughts in the comments below.
By: Jason De La Cruz
Eighteen years ago Stephen Glass fabricate a news article to be exact it was the 1998 February of Harper Magazine. Stephen Glass lied about the complete story making it up so he could get a lead. Now in present time Stephen Glass wants to be a part of the Supreme Court but others do not agree on reasoning for what happened in the past. At first, I agreed because everyone deserves a second chance but giving it a second thought I couldn’t agree, I wouldn’t want someone dishonest on the Supreme Court Staff. Clearly, Stephen Glass felt pressured that he didn’t have an article so he faked a story and made it really juicy that he that he couldn’t keep it up and now he had to live with those mistakes. Honestly, if Stephen Glass was able to make that terrible choice in the past what if it happens again but in a another way, it would affect us the people more this time if he messed up on the Supreme Court . Stephen Glass would be in charge of United States affairs and would you want that , the man who lied on magazine article would be judging future convicts and future laws. Stephen Glass shouldn’t be part of the Supreme Court just looking back at it I don’t think he would be a great for the job.
” My Life was one very long process of lying and lying again, to figure out how to cover those other lies.”- Stephen Glass
Just reading this quote made lose all trust in this man, how do we even know his real name is Stephen when he stated his life has been a really long process of lies and still trying to cover up the others. Stephen Glass, if he had come clean about every lie in life maybe i would trust the guy but until then I would not ask the guy for the time. Back to the fact he wants to be apart of the supreme court I honestly do not think he made the cut and maybe he should try another career maybe a try acting since he’s good at lying.
By: Afusat Shoaga
“Going to law school and living a normal live isn’t enough,” said Rachel Grunberg in 2011, a lawyer for the bar court.
Stephen Glass, 19 years later from his shameful leave as a journalist at the The New Republic was back in the news. The California Supreme Court, rejected Glass’s request to practice law.
The former journalist, ” has not sustained his heavy burden of demonstrating rehabilitation and fitness for the practice of law,” said the California Supreme Court.
When he was a journalist working for The New Republic, Glass has fabricated almost 50 stories in a large number of publications, spreading from the main companies to other magazines. Now that he can no longer be a journalist, he sets out to be a lawyer but is restricted to practicing by the supreme court.
Richard Bradley, a former editor of George Magazine said that Glass was ” good at finding people’s blind spots.”
Bradley noticed that 3 pieces published in George magazine contained fabrications. But, after his days of being an editor, Bradley has long forgiven Glass for his wrongdoings but says this:
“Being a lawyer is a privilege, not a right. He can be a fully contributing valuable member of society, without being a lawyer,” said Bradley.
Based on Bradley’s opinion, I agree that Glass does not need to become a lawyer. There is nothing for him to gain in doing so because he has lost all his credibility as a professional.
In March 2016 according to The Chronicle, a newspaper from Duke University, ” Glass repaid $200,000 to the New Republic and other magazines that published his work,”
Theses apologetic acts, does not seem to be completely genuine, for donating to all the magazines that he has affected, he is trying to gain their trust to prove that he is a changed man.
The Sigma Delta Chi foundations was among the places that received a donation from Glass however, the foundation rejected his offering.
In a letter sent to Glass, the foundation responded, ” Your fabrications in the late 1990’s did no harm to the SDX Foundation,”
Glass sent a donation of $26,273 to the SDX foundation which was sent back to him through electronic transfer. The foundation clarified that Glass made a mistake sending the donation to them with the thought of SDX being a substitute for George Magazine, which no longer existed.
In return the foundation asks that, “any future responses from you include the disclosure that the Foundation declined the contribution.”
By: Sandibel Betancourt
Back in the 1900 when Stephen Glass was working for “The Republic”, he got himself into an enormous amount of trouble for made up journal stories, which essentially ruined his life tremendously. After the incident, Glass went on to study for more than 10 years at Georgetown Law school and graduated in 2000, hoping to become a lawyer.
According to the Washington Post, The California Supreme Court decided to terminate his practices due to his past actions many years ago.
Before putting himself out there as a journal, he should have first learned more about what it takes and be aware of the consequences that goes on if you write a fake story or plagiarize.
In my opinion, he’s intentions were not bad at all, he wanted to be a good journal and wanted to impress everyone, but through his bad actions it backed fired on him.
I do not believe the punishment fits the crime, his mistake were done many years ago. Glass should have the right to practice law and move on with his life after apologizing more than a hundred times and paying off thousands of dollars to Harper’s Magazine and the New Republic.
I strongly believe by paying of The journalist companies and offering sincere consistent apologizes should be enough to forgive Glass. It shows he truly does care and wants to really move past these manner to start fresh.
According to Nick Rowley from Carpenter Zuckerman and Rowley, ” Stephen Glass is one of the best humans in the world. He has been a key member of my trial team for over five years, and many of my successes are very much because of Steve. There is nobody more dedicated and passionate that i know. Steve is honest and trustworthy”
Stephen Glass should get another chance, Journalism might have been his weakness, but becoming his lawyer could be his strongest. If his own lawyer employees believe he is very knowledgeable within his new career path, by all means he should continue practicing law.
We all make mistakes through our lives and we learn from our mistakes, we are not perfect human beings. He is not perfect. How would you feel if you were in his position and the Supreme Court denied you to start your career job. How would you feel?
By Sharon Llerana
He spoke with wisdom that could only come from experience. Several questions were raised every time a new piece was published.
Former writer Stephen Glass was fired in 1998 by The New Republic for fabricating about his experiences to the media. Glass gets declined to be employed with law firms based on this incident which is a reasonable punishment for what he did.
According to Vanity Fair magazine, Glass lied about his sources, quotes, and entire stories. When his boss specifically asked for any kind of information that could help him prove that what he said was real, he gave the same answer.
“It’s in my notes,” said Glass.
Statistics show that The New Republic dedicates its time and efforts to publish today’s most critical issues. Glass definitely has lost his credibility towards others as well as The New Republic.
The decision made by the court to ban Glass from practicing law is understandable. The punishment is just about right for Glass. The only way he can really move on with his life is by accepting his punishment and learning from it. The punishment does fit the crime he has committed perfectly.
Reimbursing the magazines he caused great damage to is also a great way to continue his path on learning from his mistakes. Helping his quest for forgiveness would not only hurt us but the entire reputation of everyone involved in this case.
Many people fed off of his lies every time he published a new article. Glass did not just publish one article but fifty articles full of imagination. He insulted the public and his staff by embarrassing and considering them as fools.
Glass must be banned from all law practices for the safety of this nation. Banning Stephen will inform others effectively to know that what he did was unforgivable and cannot be risked in happening again.
“My life was one very long process of lying and lying again, to figure out how to cover those other lies,” said Stephen Glass
In January 2014, the California Supreme Court banned Stephen Glass from practicing anything law after he tried to become an attorney subsequently committing a crime.
I believe California Supreme Courts decision to ban Stephen Glass from practicing law for life, was the best decision. “Shattered Glass”, a movie about a journalist named Stephen Glass who made up almost 50 stories in different publications, most in New Republic Magazine and lied to cover up his stories by creating fake websites, has been a reoccurring news story.
In March 2016 Glass “repaid $200,000 to The Republic and other magazines that published his work”according to The Chronicle newspaper from Duke University.
In October 2015 Glass sent Harper’s Magazine a check for $10,000 which was “repayment for a discredited article he had published there in 1998” according to New York Times article from Oct.16,2015. Although Glass showed good moral character, money does not buy everything and it still falls short due to his history of dishonesty, professional misconduct, lack of integrity and the tendency to rather move up on his agenda than to serve to his community, according to the movie.
In my opinion, I would not want trust any information or story he published due to the events that took place. No one will know if the information he publishes are facts or not because he was so good at lying and hiding it before.
15 years after committing the crime, he tried to become an attorney. Glass was known to only caring about himself and his work rather than serving his community. How can one serve to his community or help someone in a legal situation when he is only looking out for his best interest and is unprofessional. “Glass created fake letterheads, memos, faxes and phone numbers;…fake sources” according to Vanity Fair Hive. We cannot have an attorney who provides fake evidence. We cannot have a criminal advocating for someone who may or may not be guilty. We cannot have a criminal doing legal work.
“We must recall what is at stake is not compassion for Glass.” the court says according to Daily Mail from Jan.27,2014
By: India Gorham
By Michael Erskine
Journalist Stephen Glass, who in 1998 was found to have fabricated many of the stories that he had written for multiple magazines, is currently trying to practice law.
Glass has been sending checks to some of the magazines that have published his work, including a $200,000 check to The New Republic, in an attempt to make amends for discredited articles he has written.
Despite his efforts at reconciliation, I agree with the 2014 California Supreme Court decision that Glass “does not have the moral character critical to practice law.”
Although I do believe that Glass should be able to move on with his life, I don’t believe that he should be in a position where somebody with such a clear disregard for ethics, can be so dangerous to society.
Considering the lengths that Glass went to cover up his lies, I see the payments that he has made to magazines that had published his fabricated articles, to be an insincere gesture from a man trying to buy his way out of the problems that his lack of moral character have put him in.
If Glass had been guilty of fabricating or exaggerating one story than I would be open to the possibility of him practicing law, but he fabricated nearly 50 articles, and even when the truth was closing in on him, he went to elaborate lengths to continue his lies, before finally admitting his ethical violations.
Although Glass’s current employer, the law firm Carpenter, Zuckerman, & Rowley, says that glass is “one of the best humans in this world” and is “honest and trustworthy,” I have a hard time believing that a person can change so drastically in twenty years.
Some may say that we all did things that we regret when we were younger, and Glass should be given a second chance after all this time. I Agree that people can change but Glass was not a child when he made up his lies and the level of deception that he went to was so extreme that I doubt he has changed in a significant way.
Can a man who was so extravagantly dishonest during his career as a journalist be trusted to practice law ethically and truthfully 20 years later?
By Brianna Conroy
Money can’t buy happiness, but you can use it to pay for mistakes you have made in the past. At least that’s what Stephen Glass did. Stephen Glass was a rising journalist for The New Republic, but that all came crashing down when the magazine found that Glass fabricated at least 27 out of the 41 articles he wrote for them.
The movie “Shattered Glass” was released in 2003, which showcased his rise and fall. Glass would go on to earn a law degree, and his past came back to haunt him when he failed moral fitness tests in both New York and California, preventing him from becoming a lawyer. He appeared back in the news when he repaid The New Republic and other magazines that published his work thousands of dollars.
Stephen Glass should not be allowed to practice law due to his infamous past of being a liar. In a society where citizens are more aware than ever of unfairness from the law, the court does not need a known liar making decisions. No amount of money can change the past.
Unfairness from the law is already a huge issue in society. We can’t forget when George Zimmerman was acquitted from all charges after shooting 13 year old Trayvon Martin dead. The nation was outraged as many thought the decision was unfair. Police misconduct has people fearing for their lives when getting pulled over.
Considering the mistrust that citizens already have for the court, why would the government want a known liar making decisions? If he was certified, it would most definitely cause an outrage. Not only would there be an outrage, but the court would lose a lot of credibility. Glass being present in court decisions would cross the line from unfairness to a complete lack of ethics.
Just because Glass paid back the magazines, it does not make what he did okay. He paid The New Republic $200,000 and Harper’s Magazine $10,000. When Glass fabricated his articles, he tarnished the reputations of the publishers as well as his own. If he thinks money can fix detrimental mistakes like his, what does that say about his judgement? And someone with poor judgement like that should not be certified by the court.
One might argue that Stephen Glass has changed his ways. It has been years, he has had a chance to reflect and grow from his mistakes. And that’s not wrong. I am sure he has taken a lot of time to grow from this and become a better person. But that does not mean he is fit to work in a court of law. He is a household name because he is a liar, it is not ethical for him to make decisions for other people.
Stephen Glass does not deserve to practice law. With so much unfairness in the United States government, we do not need a famous liar working in the court. Paying back the magazines does not fix what Glass did. He affected the lives and careers of many people. Glass should not be certified on his moral fitness test and permitted to be a lawyer.
Think about if you were on trial, and Glass was a present figure there. Would you trust him?
