When it came time for his obituary, Neuman Britton, national chaplain and designated future leader of Aryan Nations, was treated just like any other local newsmaker. And because of that, some readers and staff members protested.
Some questioned why The San Diego Union-Tribune devoted so much space to Mr. Britton, an Escondido resident who preached white supremacy. Why even do an obituary, some asked. Others questioned why the newspaper included an address for donations in his name.
“Why on earth would you give information on how to make a donation to his ‘memorial fund,’ ” wrote Aaron McFarland of North Park. “Any money sent in will be used to stoke the fires of hate in America.” Including the address was akin to giving the organization free advertising, he wrote.
The article, which appeared on the obituary page Tuesday, told a compelling story about racism. A newspaper’s job is to shed light, and the obituary did just that. It told about Mr. Britton’s life, but also quoted people whose lifework is to fight bigotry. It was the Union-Tribune’s duty to report his passing and to put it into perspective.
Like some, however, I had a visceral reaction to the last paragraph that included an address for memorial donations. Was the newspaper unwittingly supporting racism by including the information?
It’s a memorial, not a contribution to his church, said Todd Merriman, senior editor for news. “We don’t interview people about where the money goes. If it had been a solicitation for his church, it would have been an easier call,” Merriman said, noting that some memorial donations are used to help the family pay expenses or to send someone to college.
“Should we not include information in his obituary that we routinely use in everyone else’s obit because he was a racist?” Merriman asked. The staff is divided about what the newspaper should have done, he said. Merriman took the view of those who were concerned about fairness. “It’s a question of whether we need to be evenhanded in the case of someone we find despicable,” he said.
“The issue is so painful to me because we strive so hard to be perceived as fair and evenhanded in how we cover the news,” Merriman said.
Initially, I thought the information should have been omitted, that I would and could live with an accusation of unfairness. But I was relying on my heart — a perilous path for journalists making decisions about controversial coverage. Now, I don’t think it was necessary to compromise the newspaper’s mission to be fair even when the person involved stood for something so many of us find hateful.
The article effectively spelled out who the man was and what he and his church sought to accomplish. People who do not share his views would not be tempted to donate to his memorial fund. And as Keith Woods, who teaches ethics at Florida’s Poynter Institute for Media Studies, pointed out, it might spur some readers to send their own contributions to organizations that fight racism; some of those names appeared in the story.
Think of it this way. Say the obituary involved someone who was a leader either for or against abortion. Don’t you think the newspaper should have included memorial information for that person, regardless of where you stand on the abortion issue? Then, it would be up to readers to decide for themselves what to do. “Just give me the facts; I’ll make up my own mind” is a lament I hear when some readers think the paper has been biased in coverage.
The newspaper crossed a threshold when it decided that the man’s passing merited a news obituary, said Poynter’s Woods. “If you crossed a threshold and decided to treat this the way you do other stories, you’ve got to go all the way with that,” he said. “It’s wrong to make capricious judgments along the way once you’ve decided this was a story worthy of an obit. You easily could have chosen not to do that. That could have been a justifiable journalism decision. But once you’ve turned it into a story, then there’s no good reason to treat it differently.”
Even if the memorial fund “had clear trails toward a white supremacy group, there are alternatives available to the paper that allow it to maintain its integrity and still be fair,” said Woods, who, in addition to teaching ethics, is Poynter’s director of diversity programs.
For example, if the fund were called “the fund for white supremacy,” the paper could take out the objectionable language or provide minimal information, Woods said. Minimal information would include something like: “A memorial fund has been set up for (name). Call (name) for more information, or check the organization’s Web site.”
The newspaper doesn’t necessarily need to tell people where to send donations, Woods said, “but you’re in the information business and somehow, you’ve got to help readers get to information.”
