Which scenarios are considered ethically acceptable for journalists? select three options. paying money to attend a conference about climate change in order to do research for an article accepting money from a politician to report on an opponent, then donating the money to a charity ending an investigation because it may lead to violence and disunity in a local community interviewing the ceos of two insurance companies that are competing against each other using information from a wiki page to clarify information about a topic

A). Paying money to attend a conference about climate change in order to do research for an article.

C). Ending an investigation because it may lead to violence and disunity in a local community.

D). Interviewing the CEOs of two insurance companies that are competing against each other.

Explanation:

Ethically acceptable scenarios would be associated with the scenarios that are morally accurate and corresponds to impartiality, responsibility, credibility, truth, and ethics.

As per the question, options A, C, and D would be considered as ethically acceptable scenarios as they correspond to unbiased, authentic, and credible information to be presented to the viewers. 'paying money to attend a research' would assist in offering a wider dimension and credible information while 'ending an investigation as it may violence and disunity' exemplify 'responsibility' which is the key code of ethics and 'interviewing two CEO's' would help present an unbiased representation. Thus, options A, C, and D are correct.

i'm not good at running

the strategies is fictional storied