Florida news media have been covering two incidents recently that have raised ethics issues and questions about newsgathering practices.
Here are questions that come to mind immediately: As competition in the news and information industry intensifies, how hard may we push for information? When are rumors OK to cover publicly?
In one incident, The Miami Herald says, a TV reporter entered the hospital room of a lobbyist who was being treated for congestive heart failure. She questioned him about his connection with Miami-Dade school board deals involving health care and land.
He said his blood pressure soared. He sued. A judge has ordered the WPLG reporter and other staff to stay away from the lobbyist for 30 days.
In another incident, according to The Orlando Sentinel, rumors on the Internet and reports in a British tabloid spooked mainstream journalists into coverage of questions about whether Florida Gov. Jeb Bush had an affair with a state official. Bush denied the rumors, but he was held up to ridicule unfairly.
News like this warps everyone’s credibility, and it doesn’t take much of that to overshadow the good investigative work and daily enterprise that are exhibited regularly at newspapers across the United States.
In assessing blame, an easy mark is the impact of heightened competition on newsgathering organizations.
Everyone’s struggling to hold on to what piece of the pie they have in a trembling economy while the expansion of print and electronic choices continue to dilute readership and viewership.
The one great bet that we can put out there on the marketplace table is compelling hard news, and that’s what aggressive news organizations are trying to produce. In the process, some highly motivated staffers – who even in good times would have done just about anything to get their stories – may go overboard. Perhaps that’s what happened in the Sunshine State.
If there is any benefit to the Florida incidents, it’s in the opportunity that’s created to review our commitment to ethics.
To do so is to consider the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, which news organizations, including the Star-Telegram, generally accept as a standard of good practice.
In view of the controversies noted above, we might pay close attention to the code’s section titled “Minimizing Harm.”
“Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect,” the section states. Then it adds details, including these two points:
- “Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage.”
- “Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.” I’d like to see the code say in no uncertain terms that anyone who uses Internet chat rooms and other Web gossip as legitimate sources without extensive verification, as in the Bush development, are running the risk of being highly manipulated and ought to have their heads examined.
Rumors are rampant on the Net, and some of them are as irresistible to journalistic watchdogs as a five-pound sirloin is to a rottweiler.
That’s not to say that there aren’t valid chunks of information floating around in cyberspace, but, at the very least, Net rumors should be treated the same way as any other rumor that piques our curiosity. It is a rumor; it must be investigated carefully and patiently and verified with documentation if and when possible.
Remember: The SPJ code advises, “Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.”
