Journalists can be a purposeful bunch. When they get together to commune over their craft, it’s easy to see that most are passionate about the job.
Recently, 30 or so ombudsmen gathered in Salt Lake City to exchange ideas about the public and its relationship with newsrooms. With representatives from the United States, Brazil, Israel, the Netherlands, Canada, South Korea, Japan, Mexico, France, Turkey and Great Britain, the Organization of News Ombudsmen’s conference April 28 to May 1 examined such subjects as reporting on suicides, the perception of the American press in the Arab world, journalism and patriotism and international coverage of the Middle East conflict.
And although dissecting the art of copy-editing may not sound exciting, 350 journalists traveled to Louisville, Ky., recently – some simply across the country; a couple from around the world – to attend the American Copy Editors Society’s annual conference, a respectable show of commitment to the craft. The gathering April 25-27 was an immersion in topics ranging from headline writing, editing for the Web, military language, understanding bias, what makes readers react and diversity in news coverage. Presenters from the likes of The Courant, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Detroit Free Press, The Washington Post, Time magazine, the State Department and the U.S. Army offered their expertise.
It might have been the company I kept at these conferences or the overriding theme of my job, but a recurring topic of discussion was how much the public loves to hate the local paper. The reasons vary from sensational headlines to unbalanced news coverage, from disagreeable editorials to disrespectful pictures. It seems to be an international pastime.
Perhaps once a month – more often if the news is particularly discomforting, such as events in the Catholic Church or in the Middle East – a “longtime reader” will call or e-mail me to say she is canceling her subscription because she “doesn’t agree with the content” of the newspaper.
As Francena Dwyer of Avon told me, “I tend to think The Courant doesn’t rise to the occasion, its choice of pictures, stories, letters to the editor and headline words. I choose to get my information from other sources, like C-SPAN, which prides itself on unbiased presentation.”
The reasoning makes sense. After all, why would you bring a disagreeable publication into your home, especially with the vast number of news sources to choose from today?
Still, I wonder how a person who understands the value of information could decide that he or she should read only agreeable information, that the disagreeable can be ignored. The decision strikes me as confining. A responsible member of a community cannot overlook differing views and news from within the community. For me, the local paper is like a member of the family: You may not like it, but …
This love-hate relationship, of course, doesn’t stop journalists, whether a reporter, a copy editor or an ombudsman. It probably makes them more committed. It’s probably a key factor in driving journalists to attend conferences such as ACES’, ONO’s and the National Writers Workshop held in Hartford and other locations last month. They are looking for ways to engage the public.
The words of Bill Kovach, chairman of the Committee of Concerned Journalists, who spoke on patriotism and journalism at the ONO conference, still resonate with me as I talk to local people who would rather not read The Courant’s take on the news:
“It is vital to the interest of the journalist and the public alike that we engage in an urgent, forceful and consistent campaign to educate the public that in a democratic society, the journalist is, in fact, exercising the highest form of citizenship by monitoring events in the community and making the public aware of them and their import; by skeptically examining the behavior of people and institutions of power; by encouraging and informing forums for public debate.”
Kovach went on to say, “The journalist has to grit his teeth and do the job [he] has to do and constantly explain why.”
Post-9/11, it seems that what suits one’s taste should be the least important criterion when trying to stay informed and understand the world.
