|
|
|
A few days ago Arthur Brisbane, former publisher of The Kansas City Star and now public editor of The New York Times, asked readers what he thought was a serious but simple question.
He basically wanted to know if they felt that news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about? To his surprise, the question caused quite a stir from those who felt he was attacking the very basics of honest journalism and from those who felt journalists should not be “truth vigilantes.”
Brisbane explained he was simply trying to find out whether readers felt reporters should always rebut dubious facts in the body of the stories they are writing.
Most reporters do try to accurately report what they see or what is told to them. But sometimes two people seeing the same car crash will give differing opinions about what happened. What about if the reporter knows, or even suspects, what is being said isn’t true? For example, when the Bush/Cheney administration told them that Iraq was building an atomic weapon, was it the reporter’s responsibility to rebut the assertion? There are myriad such examples, and it behooves the reader or viewer to retain a certain healthy degree of skepticism until sufficient data are available upon which to make an informed judgment.
Most readers believe a good reporter should be more than just a competent stenographer. While accuracy is important, good reporters have a responsibility to use their own experience and judgment to help readers find the truth. For example, if a presidential candidate releases what the reporter knows to be a partial or misleading tax return, we would want them to speak out.
I happen to be an innocent victim of the Watergate scandal and understand why it stimulated many journalism students to be come investigative reporters, but most stories are not about corruption, cheating or hidden agendas. And even when a reporter suspects that they are deliberately being given only partial or biased truths, they may not have the resources to do much about it. In such situations that is not the same as saying, “It’s not my role to investigate the truth.”
Again, from my own experience, I know of specific instances in which governments, including our own, have planted false stories for purposes that, at the time, seemed justified. I understand the military or political reasons for the recent phenomenon of allowing certain reporters to be “embedded” in a particular area of military combat, but the practice definitely compromises journalistic integrity.
Then there are writers like me who are asked to express personal opinions, but we are still expected to back up our opinions with accuracy and integrity.
A few days ago Arthur Brisbane, former publisher of The Kansas City Star and now public editor of The New York Times, asked readers what he thought was a serious but simple question.
He basically wanted to know if they felt that news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about? To his surprise, the question caused quite a stir from those who felt he was attacking the very basics of honest journalism and from those who felt journalists should not be “truth vigilantes.”
Brisbane explained he was simply trying to find out whether readers felt reporters should always rebut dubious facts in the body of the stories they are writing.
Most reporters do try to accurately report what they see or what is told to them. But sometimes two people seeing the same car crash will give differing opinions about what happened. What about if the reporter knows, or even suspects, what is being said isn’t true? For example, when the Bush/Cheney administration told them that Iraq was building an atomic weapon, was it the reporter’s responsibility to rebut the assertion? There are myriad such examples, and it behooves the reader or viewer to retain a certain healthy degree of skepticism until sufficient data are available upon which to make an informed judgment.
Most readers believe a good reporter should be more than just a competent stenographer. While accuracy is important, good reporters have a responsibility to use their own experience and judgment to help readers find the truth. For example, if a presidential candidate releases what the reporter knows to be a partial or misleading tax return, we would want them to speak out.
I happen to be an innocent victim of the Watergate scandal and understand why it stimulated many journalism students to be come investigative reporters, but most stories are not about corruption, cheating or hidden agendas. And even when a reporter suspects that they are deliberately being given only partial or biased truths, they may not have the resources to do much about it. In such situations that is not the same as saying, “It’s not my role to investigate the truth.”
Again, from my own experience, I know of specific instances in which governments, including our own, have planted false stories for purposes that, at the time, seemed justified. I understand the military or political reasons for the recent phenomenon of allowing certain reporters to be “embedded” in a particular area of military combat, but the practice definitely compromises journalistic integrity.
Then there are writers like me who are asked to express personal opinions, but we are still expected to back up our opinions with accuracy and integrity.
