| Subject: Careful review is called for |
Author:
Ned Depew
| [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 09:44:27 03/04/06 Sat
In reply to:
Gwen
's message, "Progress skips some..." on 20:19:25 03/03/06 Fri
Gwen -
As I said, it is accepted practice in the journalism industry to separate personal ideology and political connections from one's reporting. Certainly there are cases where an individual has to recuse him or herself from stories to which there is an insurmontable personal connection. But that simply stops the reporter from covering certain issues, not from being a reporter nor from having strong political views.
The principle is the same as that which creates an imaginary "firewall" between the advertising and editorial departments (one that sometimes seems especially "imaginary" - invisible and totally permeable - as it did in the case of the Register-Star and SLC). A reporter can hold strong political views and still report clearly, fairly and honestly on the "Who, What, When, Where, and How."
The new insight in this area for journalists and schools of journalism, is that it's not a question of being "objective" (which has come to be realized as an imaginary ideal) but rather of being "fair" - recognizing the reporter's own prejudices and making every effort - including peer review and editorial oversight - to avoid inserting them into the writing.
I hope you'll review the articles published by the Register-Star on the SLC matter. I think you will find, as many others have, that the coverage was full of innacuracies, of failures to pursue questions and clarify points unfavorable to the SLC position, of unquestioning repetitions of SLC press materials without the slightest effort to test claims made against opposing points of view, of direct distortions of the facts when compared with videotaped records of some of the events described. In my opinion, they could stand as something of a journalistic case study of "bad practice."
I respect your impression that the coverage was fair, but I ask you to review that judgement with the benefit of our current hindsight on the issue and in the light of differing accounts (those of the Independent and of the videotapes, for instance) that are available.
As a reporter, you should agitate through your professional organizations and your Union (if you don't have one, you should, for exactly this reason!) for fair treatment. There are ethical ways for journalists to embrace both political activism and responsible reporting. Publishers of major newspapers have already accepted this truth. Publishers of less progressive newspapers need to be educated to follow that lead.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] |
|
Feedback: 