Category Archives: Media

Exposing Fellow Journalists

By Casey Bukro

The Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics urges journalists to “expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.”

The reason for that admonition is the time-honored practice by many journalists of looking the other way when one of their fellow journalists stumbles on ethics, although they are quick to criticize lapses by anyone else.

This is changing, as a story in Salon.com about Howard Kurtz moving to Fox News shows. Salon said that Fox News is “becoming the home of disgraced journalists…..”

Sounds a bit harsh. This commentary is not intended to pile on, but to point out that a willingness to discuss alleged transgressions by journalists is among the changes as journalism transforms itself, propelled in part by the digital revolution. Online journalists are less inclined to honor sacred cows.

Kurtz came pretty close to qualifying as a sacred cow. He was Washington bureau chief for Newsweek and The Daily Beast, and commented on shortfalls in journalism on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” show. He left those posts after apologizing for errors and admitting to them on his own CNN show.

Give the guy credit for fessing up, and symbolizing a new day in journalism when good journalists point out bad journalism, or bad journalists. They should take their lumps like everyone else.

Rolling Stone Fluffed and Buffed

By Casey Bukro

Rolling Stone magazine turned Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev into a cover boy in a recent edition.

The public reaction was explosive. CNN reported that “outrage is percolating across social media” because of what some saw as the magazine’s glorification of an alleged terrorism suspect.

Rolling Stone editors did not see it that way, stating that “our hearts go out to the victims” of the bombing, but that its cover story “falls within the traditions of journalism” and the magazine’s commitment to “serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day.”

It’s not as if the magazine portrays Tsarnaev as a blameless victim. It’s story about him is titled: “The making of a monster.”

The magazine usually devotes space to rock stars and celebrities.

Handsome and young with long curly dark hair, Tsarnaev posted the picture of himself online. It has been published widely by media outlets.

Justifying its focus on Tsarnaev, Rolling Stones editors pointed out that he is in the same age group as many of the magazine’s readers, making it important to delve into how “a tragedy like this happens.”

That touched off what could be described as a war of Tsarnaev photos. Boston Magazine showed a bloodied Tsarnaev in photos taken by a Massachusetts State Police officer at the moment of the bombing suspects capture.

“This is the real Boston bomber,” the policeman told the magazine. “Not someone fluffed and buffed for the cover of Rolling Stone magazine.”

The policeman was suspended for releasing the photos, which could be important evidence in Tsarnaev’s trial. Boston Magazine also could be challenged on the ethics of publishing the photos that are part of a continuing criminal investigation.

The Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics asks journalists to “support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.” And they are urged to act independently, even when that appears contrary to strong public sentiment. Others believe the Rolling Stone violated the code’s caution against pandering to lurid curiosity.

Tsarnaev is innocent until proven guilty, and there are always more than two sides to the story. Comments in social media even reveal some sympathy for Tsarnaev.

Let’s Hear It For Ombudsmen

By Casey Bukro

What if the American public lamented the loss of media ombudsmen as much as the loss of sports stars?

When basketball superstar Michael Jordan retired in 1993 from the Chicago Bulls, and again in 1999,  public reaction was strong both times. You’d think he was a member of the family.

Even Sammy Sosa, once described as “the heart and soul of the Chicago Cubs,” provoked an outpouring of some grief when he left the Cubs under a cloud of steroid allegations. A sports writer says Chicago should welcome Sammy back to the friendly confines of Wrigley Field.

Contrast that with the departure of Patrick Pexton as the Washington Post’s last ombudsman. There was some short-lived grumbling in the journalism community, but little from the public. And that’s the interesting part. An ombudsman works on behalf of the public, and keeps an eye on their organization’s ethical standards and relationship with its audience.

The Post had employed an ombudsman for the past 43 years. The Post’s ombudsman was replaced by a reader representative, a staff member who will answer questions and respond to complaints.

Post Publisher Katharine Weymouth, in a column to readers, said the ombudsman duties “are as critical today as ever. Yet it is time that the way these duties are performed evolves.”

That word appears often these days when management justifies major changes. The business is “evolving,” as in undergoing change.

You’d think that an ombudsman would be most useful in a time of change, especially in a time of budget-cutting and layoffs — just to be sure the public interest is served, and the quality of journalism is strong.

But the number of ombudsmen at U.S. news organizations declined in the last few years, according to Marc Duvoisin, managing editor of the Los Angeles Times, who spoke at the annual meeting of the Organization of News Ombudsmen.

What do ombudsmen do? “You hold journalists accountable in much the same way that the media holds the public accountable,” said Duvoisin. They provide “tough, independent oversight.”

It’s the kind of job that tells the public “you matter.”

And it’s the sort of job the public should cheer as much as a home run or a three-point basket from mid-court.

Smart Way to Raise Revenue or Ethics Breach?

By Casey Bukro

Three California universities paid the Orange County Register in Southern California $275,000 for a year’s worth of weekly sections featuring campus life.

An NPR report asked: Is that a smart way to raise revenue, or a serious breach of journalism ethics?

Not clear is just how transparent the arrangement is, and whether readers fully understand that the coverage — including soft features, photos of students and guest columns written by faculty members — is bought and paid for, and not strictly news coverage. More like infomercials or advertorials. They are paid content.

The University of California, Irvine, California State University, Fullerton and Chapman University think it’s a good deal and a good use of publicity budgets.

A Register official said it’s “a great service for the community” and features advertisers in an advertising section.

The story quotes Tom Rosenstiel, executive director of the American Press Institute, saying readers must decide if the practice is acceptable, and whether the newspaper’s credibility is damaged. He goes on to add that as all newspapers struggle to survive, they must be creative about finding new sources of revenue.

The report also points out that sponsored content might be the future of newspapers.

Google has issued warnings on the use of advertorials on websites.

Picture This, A Newspaper With No Photographers

By Casey Bukro

Journalists are hardened by now to the continuous drumbeat of layoffs and cutbacks ripping through journalism these days, so it’s not easy to shock them.

But many were shaken by the news that the Chicago Sun-Times laid off its entire staff of 28 full-time photographers, planning to use freelance photographers and reporters to shoot pictures.

It’s ironic, really. The Sun-Times is a tabloid, dating to 1844, which built a powerful reputation on the smart and creative use of photos. Of the eight Pulitzer Prizes won by the paper, two were for photography. It was known as a picture newspaper.

What was management thinking? In a statement, it said the “business is changing rapidly and our audiences are consistently seeking more video content with their news.” Their vision is a video newspaper. Management usually has the final word in such matters.

Sun-Times reporters joined the laid-off photographers in a peaceful demonstration outside the newspaper building. The Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics says everyone, including our colleagues, is deserving of respect.

The laid-off photographers are taking it like the professionals they are.

But how many set-backs can a great newspaper take?

When Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. bought the Sun-Times in 1984, it was recast in the gaudy Murdoch image, complete with bikini-clad pinups. It was his idea of what sells newspaper. Murdoch seriously misjudged Chicago, thinking it was a blue-collar town of steel workers. Some of his star columnists defected in disgust. And they keep going.

After selling off assets, Murdoch sold the Sun-Times and left it weakened.

In 1994, the Sun-Times was bought by a company controlled by Canadian-born press baron Conrad Black. In 2007, Black was convicted of fraud and stealing $60 million from company stockholders, and sent to jail.

And now, new management is set to work its magic. Let’s hope the Sun-Times catches a break this time. It could use one.