A couple of years ago I was invited to lecture at a university about news ombudsmanship. I was asked to include in my talk some of the things I try to accomplish as an ombudsman.
I have made that list of things a regular part of the talks I have given since then to many groups. But I have never shared those thoughts with you.
So here are some of the things I have tried to accomplish during the last few years as the ombudsman of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:
To make readers continue to think of this newspaper as “my newspaper” (meaning the reader’s), not as “your newspaper” (meaning mine).
When I get a call from a reader telling me, “I don’t like what you are doing to my newspaper,” I know I have a good chance of keeping that person as a regular reader.
But if a complaining reader says, “I don’t like what you are doing to your newspaper,” I’m in trouble because that person has severed a personal attachment to the paper.
To define the mission of the newspaper and to explain why we act as we do.
It is important to inform readers that malice is not — at least it should not be — part of our job.
To head off libel suits by giving an offended reader an outlet to vent displeasure and to correct an error.
To be able to really listen to what a complaining reader is saying without being defensive.
That is why I do not play any role in planning what goes into the paper. There is nothing in the newspaper that, in a sense, belongs to me. Therefore I do not have to do what comes naturally: defend that which belongs to oneself.
When one starts preparing a defense on hearing a criticism, that person is no longer devoting attention to what is being said by the other person.
To explain the real meaning of the First Amendment.
Many do not realize that our Founding Fathers did not impose any ethical responsibilities or expectations on the press when they adopted the First Amendment. Nor is the First Amendment absolute, as some journalists wish it were. There are some things, such as secret military information, that the U.S. press is properly prohibited from publishing.
To make a powerful institution more caring and compassionate.
To show readers that they can make a difference with their comments.
We have the daily Weather Digest and neighborhood rain gauge reports because of numerous requests from readers. We have a listing of all the day’s obituaries on Page 2A because of the suggestion of a single reader.
To be there for those who simply want to sound off about a subject.
Many times I have found that readers simply want an outlet to vent their rage at someone. Many times this letting off of steam is all that readers need to do to relieve their displeasure with the newspaper. That is why a former ombudsman for The Washington Post once described this job as being the newspaper’s “designated punching bag.”
To be able to provide a reasonable explanation when there is one.
To be able to simply say, “We goofed,” when we just plain messed up.
To be able to say sincerely, “I’m sorry,” when we have hurt a reader.
When this has occurred, the harmed reader may simply want some compassion, not an explanation.
To attempt to build the credibility and image of this business, to remind readers that we can be caring, concerned and compassionate.
And, finally, to constantly remind my colleagues that we are supposed:
- To scrutinize, not to “get.”
- To be sincere, not mean-spirited.
- To be skeptical, not cynical.
- To be forthcoming, not peeping Toms.
- To report, not to hunt heads.
- To present the truth as we find it to be, not as we wish it to be.
- To get it right — and that this can be more important than being first.
- To be prepared to carry the burden of truth-seekers. We should hope to earn respect by the way we do our job, but we should not expect to be loved.
- To not needlessly offend our readers, who invite us into their homes.
- To be servants of the truth and of the public instead of being so self-centered.
That is what I try to accomplish as an ombudsman. I frequently accomplish my mission, and that adds to the newspaper’s credibility. But I fail on occasion because of my shortcomings, and that is unfortunate — for it means that a chip in our credibility goes unrepaired.
