Jordan has been following an important case since the beginning. He wrote about the crime, arrest, and guilty verdict. He is preparing to cover sentencing and hopes to meet with the victim for background information. Jordan tries calling the victim several times. In response, he gets an angry call from the victim advocate demanding he respect the victim’s privacy. Flustered, Jordan stammers out an apology. Then he suggests that running his story might mean the victim gets more support and fewer questions from people in the long run. The next day, the advocate says the victim will speak with Jordan if he provides a list of questions in advance. She explains that some members of the victim’s family have complicated immigration statuses and feel uneasy about any focus on the family. A few family members are also concerned about reprisals from the offender's friends. Jordan sends the questions to the advocate. The next day he gets an email from the victim's sister with detailed answers to the questions. Jordan thanks her and starts writing so he can submit his story before the sentencing hearing. Shortly after he finishes his story, the advocate calls him. She says the family is angry the sister sent so much information, and they do not want it revealed. Would publishing the piece violate the victim’s legal rights? Reporters have a responsibility both to inform the public and to protect their sources. From an ethical standpoint, what should Jordan do? What about from a practical standpoint? Should Jordan risk alienating the advocate by running the story? Angering his boss by failing to submit a story? In your response to this question, be sure to answer ALL 3 numbered parts to this prompt. Use these guidelines when crafting your response: Use a complete sentence to answer prompt 1. Here's a sentence starter you can use: Publishing the piece (would)(would not) violate the victim's legal rights because ... Write 3-5 sentences to answer prompt 2. Write 7-8 sentences to answer prompt 3. Make sure each response is clear a