For all the changes in journalism – and all the white-hot focus the social media world puts on our work (and everyone else’s) – some things are just as tough to decide now as they were in the days of grizzled editors with green eyeshades and a trusty red pencil to scratch your story into a proofread, marked-up puzzle.
Prime example: Late last night, after we posted a story with the names of those involved in an awful crash, someone posted a comment that linked to our story from six months ago about the arrest of one victim.
Do you add that to the crash story or not?
I did, in the last paragraph, without any new attention drawn to it via Facebook, Twitter, etc.
A firestorm erupted (so easy to do now with anything one does online) – how dare we, what does it have to do with the crash etc.
So I removed it. And all the comments, 99 pct. criticizing us for doing that.
It’s never an easy call. Do we have the right to report the background? Of course. But is it right? I honestly don’t know.
The call, either way, leaves me frustrated. You don’t want to let the “mob/horde” dictate judgment calls, but even a mob can have a point worth considering. Such as: the seeming hypocrisy of putting such info in a story in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy when at the same time I/we constantly plead for folks to have sensitivity to family and friends when posting comments on tragic news items.
We have no idea if the victim’s alleged crimes 6 months ago are germane to the fatal crash. That could come weeks, even months down the line. Will it be “less wrong” to make the connection then? Will we be under just as much fire?
I tell folks in our profession – and any, really — the trick, the balance is to not have too thick a skin or too thin a skin, as either can get you in trouble.
A corollary of that is: If you consider the scenario I just laid out an “easy call,” you need to rethink things. Because it should never be an easy call. And while it could be a great discussion topic in a Journalism Ethics 101 class, you’re probably never going to convince everyone (or necessarily a strong majority) that one way or the other is the right call.
Some say, “Well what if it was your family?” And I say, who’s family doesn’t have tragedy in it? My half-brother died in a car crash 30 or so years ago. What do I remember about the two brief items in the daily paper, tucked back toward the classifieds? That each misspelled his name, in different ways.
We’re all human. There are no obvious, perfect paths in such ethical dilemmas. The struggle is worth it, and yes, I waver back and forth, seeing both sides (or in some cases, the many sides) of the tough calls.
It’s not and never will be what some claim: That the decisions are made based on what will stir folks up and “grab ratings.” That’s a basic misunderstanding of what we reporters as flawed humans do every day. Do we try to do interesting stories? Of course. I have never seen a reporter who wants to hurt people and makes that the goal of a story or decision.
Some times it’s so obvious the right path we don’t have to think twice. Then there are the ones where we can second-guess ourselves into paralysis. I can argue each side of this morning’s ethical question just as fervently and passionately. But that doesn’t make the judgment call any easier.
Leave it to Barney 
I would say that you can’t have it both ways; On the one hand asking people repeatedly to be sensitive and on the other hand all bets are off once the name is announced.
I also wonder what one incident had to do with the other?
I think that the family would be hurt by that being part of his newspaper epitaph.
Well I make that very point in this post. And I also pointed out that the two incidents COULD have to do with each other, depending on what the cause of the crash is determined to be. Also, sorry but I and others in the media are not writing an obituary or death notice, which of course the family writes and has full control over. I wrote a news story, and while I can make the call whether to leave it out or not and take the heat either way, we DIDN’T go looking for that info – a commenter did, and it’s VERY easy for folks to look up past stories on anyone and anything. Then it’s their call, of course.