Truth, Journalism, and Stuff

One of Lebanon Truth's most recent posts got me thinking about journalism.

Specifically, the following passage from this post:

So that is why it is disturbing that the journalism program at the high school seems not to be teaching reporters ethics and good manners. The statement in the school paper is libelous -- it recklessly quotes an adult as saying that the superintendent was fired from two jobs in a manner that would lead the average reader (a teenager) to believe it is true. There were warnings within Shearer's diatribe that he was an unreliable source: he spewed forth a fountain of alleged facts. for example, at least 75% of the people in town want Robinson gone. He knows that from his informal conversations with people. He knows that Robinson was fired because he called people in those towns. (If you really wanted to know what happened, you should check school board minutes or at least the local paper). The student shuld have been directed to remove the quote or include a clarification of the real state of affairs. The student should have been taught that there is a difference between getting fired for cause and not having a contract extended.

I don't know any other way to say this, so I'll be direct: I think this is sloppy writing on the part of LT, and as a result, it's likely to be incendiary irregardless of its truth. Case in point: Even given the number of examples LT uses, the statement "seems not to be teaching reporters ethics and good manners" is incendiary because it's a far different claim than merely pointing out multiple examples of "bad" journalism or mistakes on the part of the journalism staff. Also, it's a claim against the newspaper advisor and the newspaper staff - it implies that the staff is doing a bad job because they are not getting the proper instruction.

To put it another way: A series of examples is not a generalized (or generalizable) claim about the program. There's an immense amount of space between the two.

So: Is LT correct? In some ways, it doesn't matter. Why? Because the tone of the comment almost insures it will be rejected by the people it seems to be directed at: those people involved with the journalism program.

For the record, I think LT is correct on the substance of their comments, and I hope the Warrior Spirit folks have the time and energy to track down more background on the story - because the other big subtext of what's going on is that I happen to know the newspaper's editorial staff was decimated over the summer, and as a result, they've had a heck of a time just getting an issue out. For that reason alone I am not surprised that someone would take issue with the content of their first publication of the year - it was produced under far more stress than normal and with a less experienced staff than normal. That and I would love to see the WS staff find the time and energy to really dive into this issue in way the Lebanon or Albany papers haven't - it's not often that a high school newspaper gets the chance to do original reporting that can compete with an "official" publication, but this might be one of those chances.

We are talking about a high school journalism program here, and inasmuch as LT says "Journalism is a great way for students to learn some great skills and have tons of fun. And they will learn from their mistakes, but don't we have an advisor to keep them from practicing mistakes that will hurt others?" I think that these kinds of things are going to happen, and calling folks out as a first step is not the most productive way to address the problem. Certainly taking a veiled swipe at the journalism advisor isn't going to help things either. That sort of action creates a divide, an us-vs.-them setup (one that journalists can fall into very easily, I think) where there doesn't need to be one. Besides, this sort of error happens in the world of "professional" journalism all the time, and often with equal or greater consequences. Mistakes will happen, so I guess I'd suggest that how one deals with them is probably more telling than the mistake itself.

My experience with my college paper also suggests that journalists, for whatever reason, tend to fall into a defensive mode at darn near the drop of a hat, and once that happens, it's that much harder to build a positive relationship based on trust. And needless to say, a positive relationship based on trust is a good thing for all parties concerned - it gets journalists access and it (I know, I know) tends to result in better coverage for the non-journalist party involved.

So in this case I might have suggested that LT take their concerns to the editor or advisor directly (if such a thing is possible) and frame them as pointing out factual inaccuracies in the story (because journalists tend to respond to that sort of claim), and then let the newspaper staff do the work themselves and correct their own mistake. Pointing it out to the world in this way is, I think, unnecessarily confrontational.