June 4, 2009
Industry chaos provides reporters with an opportunity to rethink standards
By Robert Niles
8 comments | 
Archive Link
As old newsrooms shrink, or close, journalists now can address these questions in the context of new opportunities, whether they be self-publishing or working with other journalists in new, online start-ups.
Let's look at this within the context of a personal example. Recently, I attended an awards ceremony for the winners of a Los Angeles County student writing competition. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa presented awards to nine students in three age categories, winners of a writing content open to all public and private school students in county. Before the presentation, panel of four professionals gathered on stage at the city's Zipper Concert Hall to talk about writing and take questions from the audience, which included the classmates, families and friends of the winners.
The panel included an Academy Award-winning movie producer and screenwriter, a novelist, an academic and a metro reporter for the Los Angeles Times. The LAT reporter faltered when challenged by the parent of one of the winners about the timing of a recent Times story about LA Unified school teachers. The story, about teachers who were paid not to teach in lieu of being fired, ran during Teacher Appreciation Week at many schools throughout the area.
The parent (not me, by the way) asked: Why did the story run that week? Was the Times trying to insult teachers, the majority of whom work hard and do well? Why doesn't the Times run stories about successes in the schools as often as it runs stories about failures?
The Times reporter, who had written the story in question, responded that neither he nor the paper had an agenda. He'd been working on the story for some time, and that just happened to be the week that it was ready to run. He and the other reporters at the paper have a lot of stories to cover, and report the ones that seem "newsworthy."
So what is newsworthy?
Perhaps it says something that no story about this event appeared in the LA Times, or, as far as I've been able to tell, any other newspaper in the Los Angeles area. Clearly, in the eyes of local journalists, a twice-a-year essay contest, with winners honored by the mayor, is not newsworthy.
Fair enough. But what, then, is?
Apparently, having 160 teachers and staff idled while awaiting discipline is newsworthy. And that's fair, as well. Since I'm a geek about such things, let's look at the math, shall we?
On one hand, you've got 18 students each year, out of a million-plus in the county, winning writing awards in the Mayor's competitions. On the other, you have 160 teachers and staff out of thousands in the LA Unified District sitting idle and getting paid. Basic math, then, dictates that the essay winners are more unusual, and by one definition, "newsworthy" than the accused teachers.
Is being simply out of the ordinary a good definition for newsworthiness? Should we look only to the edges of the bell curve for news stories?
Maybe there are stories in the middle of the bell curve, as well. How newsworthy should it be, for example, that a child of professional writers wins a writing award? Frankly, that doesn't sound all that unusual. Sports fans can list plenty of kids of pro athletes who went on to play sports. Every year at the Academy Awards, fans see several sons and daughters of actors who have followed their parents' path into the craft. Not that big of a deal, right?
Perhaps it is a big deal, after all. Look through the immense number of studies done about school performance and you'll find that the dominant predictor of student success is... the education and income of their parents. Middle and upper-class children of English-speaking parents with advanced degrees overwhelming do well, regardless of where they go to school - public or private, city or suburb. And low-income kids of poorly educated parents with few English skills struggle, again, regardless of where they go.
Reporters who spend their time at the edges of the bell curve, and fail to tell the story of what is happening to the vast majority of the residents in their communities provide a warped narrative, one that readers may find less and less relation with over time. Reporters who write stories from just one end of the bell curve (just the bad stuff, or just the good stuff) provide an even more warped view.
So what is newsworthy? The edges of the bell curve or the middle?
I haven't told you, and I won't. That's a decision that each publisher must make. But be aware that your decision about newsworthiness will make an impact in your community, and it might not be the effect you intended.
Publish a story knocking teachers - even ones who deserve it - during a teacher appreciation week, without running any items lauding teachers from the other end of the bell curve, and you should not be surprised to elicit accusations that your publication doesn't support teachers. Or education. That might not have been your intent, but if your concept of newsworthiness leads you to publish such a line-up of stories, the public's perception of your intentions will become the public's reality.
Smart reporters ought to anticipate what affect their reporting will have upon the public, and tailor their work so that it will not elicit an undesired effect. "Throwing it out there," with no thought toward where it lands, is, literally, irresponsible reporting.
And let's retire the naive rule that journalists ought not to have an agenda. To write without an agenda is to write without purpose - a sloppy exercise by an unskilled scribe. Any writer should be able, and willing, to articulate what he or she wants to accomplish when putting reporting in front of the public. Let's be transparent. Know for what you stand.
If we want people to read, respect and perhaps even pay for our work, we need to treat them with respect, in return. We need to think consciously about newsworthiness and consider the impact of those decisions. We need to articulate to the public the intent behind our work and acknowledge, even apologize, whenever our work creates an unintended effect. We can't insult the public's intelligence by claiming we write without an agenda, nor should we insult our potential influence by claiming the same.
The disruptions wreaking our industry provide us an opportunity to break some habits, as we try to launch new news publications, or to save old ones. Let's not simply fall into the same habits that helped get our publications into the messes they are in today.
On a personal note, I wanted to express my support for Current TV journalist Laura Ling, with whom I spoke on a panel at a news conference in February 2008. Ling and colleague Euna Lee are on trial in North Korea, after having been arrested while shooting a story on Korean refugees.
More about: ethics
Comments (8) • 
Email to a friend
Responses via 
Technorati • 
Google Blog Search
Share on 
del.icio.us • 
Digg
Comments:
From Pam Fine on June 5, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Robert,You make several good points, particularly about recognizing that readers want their local news organizations to "celebrate" community successes as well as note the failures. I also agree that over time, good beat reporting should reflect the range of issues, topics and sources that make,for example, the state of education and learning opportunities what they are in LA. That said, however, I'd argue that we need more watchdog coverage not less, and that stories like the one on idle teachers being paid for years when school budgets are shrinking recognizes a significant and costly problem that needs to be solved. The balance I think your seeking in redefining what's newsworthy--a discussion, by the way, that's been going on since Colonial times in this country and whenever the NYTimes runs a story on on Britney Spears-- could result in fewer stories being told about bad stuff that needs to be fixed. Sure, I want the local health reporter to write about the doctor who donates time in clinics in poor communities but its more important to understand the dynamics preventing us from developing a health care system that doesn't require the doctor's largesse.
As to your comment about timing, many newsrooms should and do pay attention to timing of articles, especially around holidays. When I was managing editor of the Star Tribune in Mpls we used to refer to the Santa Claus factor, the idea being that you don't publish investigative or enterprise stories about child abuse or other horrific acts during Christmas and other holiday periods. In other words, editors do consider what's happening with their audiences--if they know what's happening...
From alan buchanan on June 5, 2009 at 1:20 PM
It must be hard being a journalist in todays climate. In saying that, everyone seems to be getting it tough its not just journalism. I wonder where all the money is going? someone must be getting it, it doesnt just dissappear into thin air does it??Alan - elottery syndicate
From bertrand jacques on June 5, 2009 at 3:09 PM
great write up Robert.I think journalists should take care of the quality of the articles they write. it's so easy now to check everything up on the web, and if something is wrong, reader will find out and give less credit to that journalist.
From Darleene Powells on June 5, 2009 at 6:39 PM
What you're describing -- the give and take of reporting both good and bad news on any given beat -- is often called community journalism, which most aspiring LA Times/NY Times/Washington Post reporters sneer at as beneath them.From Andres E on June 5, 2009 at 11:50 PM
Journalist follows certain code of ethics in creating or writing news. They have to be objective with the issue and their main purpose was to inform the public with the current news which are circulating local/ worldwide. The reports must be true, substantial, and tactful to avoid any confusion. Perhaps nowadays most journalists are on the look out for the impact of global recession, life after the recession struck. Vies as to how people deal with the uncertainties brought by global financial crisis. We people tend to save money. Sometimes we sacrifice our social activity to just such having a party just for the sake of saving money while the financial condition is not yet been fully recovered from its normal flow. Party planning is now a career in areas considered urban and hip. However, for the average families get together, learning how to throw parties and do it on the cheap is a credit to resourcefulness. Throwing a rocking shindig without needing loans to do it is what you want to shoot for, and venue and décor are the expenses you want to cut down on. It's good to do a little shrewd party planning without needing credit repair after the bash.From Concasseur frankie on June 7, 2009 at 11:19 PM
When I was managing editor of the Star Tribune in Mpls we used to refer to the Santa Claus factor, the idea being that you don't publish investigative or enterprise stories about child abuse or other horrific acts during Christmas and other holiday periodshttp://www.sbmconcasseur.com/broyeur-industriel/
From inhl888 kelly on June 8, 2009 at 1:25 AM
Perhaps nowadays most journalists are on the look out for the impact of global recession, life after the recession struck. Vies as to how people deal with the uncertainties brought by global financial crisis.This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
RSS Feed
From 98.169.48.252 on June 5, 2009 at 6:11 AM
If this is the future of "journalism" -- I fear for the public. I was expecting a thoughtful, insightful piece about how online journalists will "save" writing, not an account of a writing contest. And we never find out what advice the young writers offered, what they wrote about, why they are worth covering. It is an empty-headed rant from someone who doesn't understand writing.