Why did Stephen Glass do what he did? What ethical flags does it raise for communicators?

Stephen Glass feel in love with the idea of being one of the best reporters in the world. He wanted every story to be a home run. He made his stories very elaborate and interesting to readers by altering details, adding little tidbits, and eventually just making up entire stories. While his fellow reporters were traveling to foreign countries and writing about oil supplies, Stephen was receiving attention for finding outrageous stories to write about.

His stories were very entertaining, but were presented as fact with they were not. He should have pursued a career writing fiction and not reporting stories. I have no doubt he would have been very successful at that. Instead he cause controversy and put the news reporting world under a microscope.

As communicators are we entitled to "make a story more interesting?"  Under some circumstances I say yes. Comedians always exaggerate stories to comedic effect. The audience expects it. It is not expected that a reporter would include lies in a story that is written as fact. It is irresponsible and unethical to lie about a story that never happened. Those stories cannot and should not ever be altered for the sake of entertainment. The news is simply the news.

As communicators we must be careful with how we deliver our messages. If we exaggerate then we could lose all credibility and affect the credibility of those who will follow in our footsteps. Almost nothing could be more dangerous for us, as our message will not be received if we make this mistake.