A contingent from Children’s Hospital Medical Center visited Thursday to voice concerns about the Stephen Polen case.
Revealing the identity of the 14-year-old abuse victim and showing photos of his injuries were unnecessary, they said, and only added to his trauma.
It reminded me of several other calls and e-mails I’ve received lately from people saying “cops-and-courts” coverage victimizes people, with little or no benefit to the community.
A recent Crime Watch item said a Norton man was charged with domestic violence after punching and choking his wife.
That part was true, the daughter said when she called.
Her problem? By naming her father, the paper identified her mother — an innocent in this case — causing all kinds of repercussions for a woman who already is dealing with a lot of problems.
“Why would you do this to my mother?” she asked. “She can’t go out of the house now because everyone treats her differently. And people are cruel. They think they are helping, but people are hurting her.”
Here’s another example: A court story revealed allegations of sexual harassment between an area podiatrist and his former office manager. There is no question that the details taken from court documents embarrassed both people. The case ended with the podiatrist paying an out-of-court settlement.
A relative defended the doctor as a “kind person with a fantastic sense of humor.
“I would also like to point out that as much as you may help people on occasion, you also have the power to hurt. What has the world gained by your article? Was it helpful to anyone? I can’t see how it would be.”
These examples show what “cops-and-courts” reporters learn from the first day on the job. Police reports and court documents are public record, open to everyone, including the media. However, friends, family and the subjects themselves often say the paper has no right to publicly humiliate them.
Mostly they complain the stories are an invasion of their privacy and that people seem to be “guilty until proven innocent” in stories.
In particular, people who are involved in police and courts stories often see them with an intensely personal interest. So close that they inevitably see the stories as one-sided and unfair.
Journalists regard police-and-court coverage as basic to newspapering — important information the public has a right and a need to know.
Charlene Nevada, the editor who supervises coverage in these areas, said she gets more complaints about the Sunday Crime Watch than from any stories written by reporters.
“But people love the blotter (Crime Watch),” Nevada said. “They read it. They want to know why the police car was at their neighbor’s home. They want to know if someone broke into a nearby home and stole a bunch of jewelry.”
The police, court officials, judges, even jurors are paid by and serve the general public. “I believe we have an obligation — not to mention a right — to tell people how their tax dollars are being spent,” Nevada said.
People in the media talk a lot about the duty to inform the public.
Phil Trexler, the reporter who wrote the podiatrist story, strongly defends it. “I believe it was a duty of our newspaper to inform the public about a doctor who holds himself out to the community as a medical professional.”
The doctor’s relative disagreed, saying it was “more about whispering gossip over the back fence,” and it served no higher purpose.
A key question seems to be, how much identifying information does the public want or need? Not even journalists at the Akron Beacon Journal agree.
Trexler, for one, said he believes names should be left out of Crime Watch because 30 percent to 40 percent of the time, the accused is acquitted. “An age and street address, I believe, would suffice to inform the public of what occurred,” he said.
The daughter concerned about her abused mother said no names should be included unless the family is consulted. The podiatrist’s relative said the paper damaged the reputation of a man who has helped many people.
And the Children’s Hospital people said identifying Stephen Polen added nothing to the story.
Beacon Journal Managing Editor Thom Fladung said he understands the concerns, but disagrees. “Names are important to establish credibility. They are one of the essential facts of any storytelling, and we need to deal in facts to get as close as possible to the truth.”
Still, when the respected medical director of Children’s care center, Dr. R. Daryl Steiner, says identifying Stephen left him powerless in the same way his abuser tried to control him, that gets people’s attention.
“These are not easy decisions for us, nor are their concerns taken lightly,” said Editor Jan Leach. “Our mission is to inform, to provide the community with the information it needs to make smart decisions. Unfortunately, that sometimes means people are going to be hurt or embarrassed by our stories.”
