Is there such a thing as courtesy in journalism?

I'd certainly argue that there is. Unfortunately sensationalism seems to have long since, taken over any sense of decorum and courtesy that media outlets would have otherwise considered fundamental to journalistic integrity. Then again, I wonder if journalistic integrity means anything these days.

The Toronto Star published an article about some academic and fairly important issues that Sikhism must understand and deal with today. The article wasn't bad, but title was unbelievably inflammatory and sensationalistic. It was quite simply hurtful to the Sikh community.

I'd posit that even sensational and inflammatory journalism could be acceptable and even necessary at times. But this certainly was not one of them. The Star has been reporting on Sikhs for so many years, and has helped the community recognize and work to alleviate some growing pains. For that they should be thanked. But that certainly does not justify taking liberties with titles so as to make false, and disrespectful links that would hurt the sentiments of any community (let alone the Sikh community). The absolute worst part is that such a title just wasn't necessary. I would ask for any apology from the Star, but its pretty clear they don't give a damn. They could have had so very many different titles for the article that its just incriminates their sense of need for sensational and inflammatory journalism all the more.

Alas. Back to studying torts. (Yes, I realize the irony...)

You can read the article I'm referring to here.