Viewers question the accuracy of a statement by former New York City Police Commissioner Howard Safir on the recent PBS documentary “After Newtown: Guns in America.” The statement involved the description of the “Street Sweeper” shotgun with a 100-round magazine.

PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler looked into the matter and says he finds it awkward to doubt the answers of a big city police commissioner about guns, yet he still doesn’t have documented evidence to back up the commissioner’s statement.

Therefore, says Getler, “I’m on the side of the viewers on this one.”

Major American newspapers like The New York Times employ editors who are supposed to mediate between journalists and readers. But the work of the ombudspeople is not welcome everywhere.

“Why are we here, if not to let people know what is going on and to provide them with the news they need and want to see? ”
– Ted Diadiun, reader representative at the Cleveland Plain Dealer

“Many of the complaints I get in the public editor’s in-box are about phrases that The New York Times uses,” says Margaret Sullivan. Readers note that language choices make a huge difference in perception, especially when they accept and adopt government-speak.

Among the examples: Why is torture called a “harsh interrogation technique”? Why is a premeditated assassination called a “targeted killing”? And if a suspected terrorist has been locked up at Guantánamo Bay for more than a decade, why call him a “detainee”?

Language matters, adds Sullivan. “Word choices like these deserve thoughtful consideration – and, at times, some institutional soul-searching.”

If inaccurate information is contained in a newspaper’s archive, and not corrected, it can be republished at a later date, much to the regret of all concerned. Unfortunately, says Belfast Telegraph Readers’ Editor Paul Connolly, it happened.

“Although in my position as an ombudsman I do see myself as a type of judge or arbitrator, I do not consider myself a moral authority, casting judgments on what is ethically justifiable and what is not.”
— Tamedia Ombudsman Ignatz Stuab