 One of the principle ethical philosophies is consequentialism, a class of normative ethical theories. This theory can be seen as one of the leading moral perspectives in Western society, and it has dominated media ethics during the last century. As its name suggests, consequentialism holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act is one that will produce a good outcome or consequence. One of the philosophies within consequentialism, besides several classic variations, is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics which holds that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility in this context is happiness or pleasure. In short, this is about the greatest good for the greatest number. By asking what will bring the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest number of people, utilitarians are trying to find out what is best for society as a whole. Back in the 19th century, Jerry Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, developed the hedonistic calculus. This is a way of calculating how an act will result in the best outcome for the most people. He actually tried to transform ethics into an exact science. By waiting the pleasures and pains of any given action, his conclusion was that any action that produced more pleasure than pain was morally right. In media and journalism, we can identify examples of a utilitarian way of thinking on a daily basis. Let's take, for example, the invasion of privacy that occurs when a photo of a fatal car accident is published in a newspaper. We all understand that this will cause harm to the victim's family. But at the same time, it is perceived as very important to inform the public about this accident and to warn them about risky behavior. John Stuart Mill expanded this concept of utility to include not only the quantity, but also the quality of pleasure. He stated that people are completely free to make their own choices, as long as their actions don't harm others. Mill argued that to be completely happy, we have to be free and independent. But unlike Bentham, he doesn't agree that happiness can be calculated. Some forms of happiness are more worthy than others. So his viewpoint on utilitarianism is more qualitative than quantitative. Utility is thus defined by Mill as happiness with the absence of pain. And in order for the action to be moral, it must be the optimal choice in increasing utility and minimizing pain. For most people, this way of thinking about happiness sounds quite logical and wonderful, and the utilitarian idea therefore dominated the landscape of moral philosophy. But there are some famous critics on this way of thinking. One of these critics is John Rawls. We will be exploring his perspective on utilitarianism in the next clip. We will also apply the ideas of consequentialism and utilitarianism to our current media environment.