http://www.tomliberman.com image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

The freelancer who contacted the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was troubled at learning that the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post had stopped endorsing presidential candidates prior to the last election.

“I realize a newspaper isn’t necessarily required to issue a presidential endorsement, but both papers have a long history of doing so, so the decision not to do one is clearly a deviation from the norm, and I’d expect that would require a valid and ethical reason. So far, the reasons provided by both publications are far from transparent or satisfactory.”

The anguished journalist admitted the endorsement issue is “weighing heavily on me since I’ve already become incredibly disillusioned with my own industry over coverage of this election…. I fear the news media already has and continues to fail its responsibility to upholding democracy.”

A retreat

Clearly, the journalist is upset at seeing a retreat from an historic media responsibility for leading public opinion at a time when parts of the media industry are redefining themselves. And give her credit for taking journalism and its responsibilities seriously.

The endorsement issue captured national attention during a wild election campaign involving a candidate known to punish those deemed disloyal to him, sowing an undercurrent of fear and caution in the media.

But this was happening at a time when political endorsements are not as common as we might think.

Once ubiquitous

“While such plugs were once ubiquitous, they’ve faded in recent decades,” reported mentalfloss.com. It said a survey by Editor & Publisher “showed that by 1996, almost 70 percent of newspapers weren’t endorsing presidential candidates….”

“Part of this is probably a reluctance to engage in partisan politics, but it also probably speaks to the decline of the newspaper as a central aspect of Americans’ lives.

“With so many avenues available for voters to get to know the candidates, it seems rather quaint to think of anyone voting how an editor tells them to.”

Social media impact

That’s another way social media changed the way journalism and the American public operate.

Two highly circulated newspapers, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal, do not endorse political candidates. The last time WSJ endorsed a candidate was in 1928, plugging for Herbert Hoover, considered “the soundest proposition for those with a financial stake in the country.” A disastrous stock market crash soon followed, souring The Journal on endorsements.

“Big headlines popped up in media circles…when the billionaire owners of The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times blocked editorials that would have endorsed Kamala Harris,” wrote Rick Edmonds of the Poynter Institute in an article explaining “why newspaper presidential endorsements have become an endangered species.”

Resignations

The blocked editorials resulted in resignations at the Times and an angry petition from opinion writers at the Post. The Times admitted losing thousands of readers because of their decision.

“I had already been looking at regional papers, where the steady move away from taking sides in presidential elections has become an epidemic,” wrote Edmonds.

“Independent, locally owned organizations dominate the shrinking list of holdouts,” said Edmonds. “Here, too, disengagement is becoming a trend.”

Murky

That included the Minnesota Star Tribune, which published an explanation, said Edmonds, “that reads, to me, as many such do: murky and excuse-filled.”

The shadow of presidential reprisals hovers over media, along with deep public distrust of media. Among Edmonds’ reasons for ending political handicapping is one that touches on public perceptions. 

“No matters how many times the clarification is offered that an editorial board and the newsroom operate separately, many readers don’t see the distinction or don’t believe there is one.”

Ethics issue

This becomes solidly a media ethics issue.

Other issues Edmonds cited include pinched staffs and space, a belief that readers don’t want editors telling them what to think and the argument that regional papers don’t speak with authority on national matters.

The New York Times among national newspapers still endorses political candidates.

Partly from the public blowback from blocking endorsements, the owners at The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times issued statements.

Tip scales

Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, said: “Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip scales of an election. No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are doing to say, ‘I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.’ None. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence.”

Similarly, Times owner Dr. Patrick Soon- Shiong, said in an interview: “The process was (to decide): how do we actually best inform our readers? And there could be nobody better than us who try to sift the facts from fiction” while leaving it to readers to make their own final decisions. He feared picking a candidate would create deeper divisions in a nation already deeply divided over politics.

Some writers, like Jerry Moore of The Hill publication, reacted to declining political endorsements by saying: “What took them so long?” He thinks they have “outlived their purpose.”

Muddy waters

Political endorsements “muddy the waters of a newspaper’s independence,” he wrote. “A candidate favored by editorial board members becomes ‘their’ candidate moving forward.”

While “some journalists are calling it a betrayal of democratic responsibility,” writes David Artavia in yahoo!news.

That was exactly the point raised by Tara, the freelancer who came to the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists looking for advice.

Providing facts

The AdviceLine advisor, David Craig, wrote in his report on the case: “We discussed her question but also two broader issues: the more general practice of newspaper endorsements of presidential candidates, beyond the two instances she raised. And her concern about whether (apart from editorial page choices) the normal approach to news reporting of just providing the facts – and the conventional frameworks of journalism ethics – work in what she saw as abnormal times with a threat to democracy if Donald Trump were re-elected.

“I told her I thought the decisions by the Times and Post owners were questionable from the standpoint of the principle of the (Society of Professional Journalists) code of being accountable and transparent, especially since the decision not to endorse was different from the recent past for these publications and came so close to the election.

After backlash

“I think they should have better explained the decisions both internally and externally, though Post owner Jeff Bezos did publish an opinion piece explaining his decision after backlash. I also told her I thought they violated the principle of acting independently by blocking the editorial boards from endorsement.

“She said she felt more comfortable about how she had understood the ethics of the decisions after hearing my perspective, which was essentially in line with hers.”

As for the broader issue of newspaper endorsements, Craig “noted my concern about possible negative impact on audience trust given the widespread distrust of news media today and perceptions of bias.”

Hold to principles

Addressing the broader concerns about the state of journalism, Craig urged the freelancer “to hold to the SPJ code’s principles of seeking truth, minimizing harm, acting independently and being accountable and transparent because they are not just journalism principles but human principles.

“Although there was no specific decision at issue here, it was evident she takes these matters very seriously, and she appreciated getting to talk about them.”

*********************************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.