BAD NEWS, AND GOOD JUDGMENT, IN A SMALL TOWN

Arguably, the toughest part of any job in journalism is exercising the right judgment with respect to news coverage.

So many decisions by so many players are required every single day, in determining how the news should be reported, packaged and shared, or even whether something should be reported at all. And that’s where judgment comes in.

Tough calls abound. Should a newspaper publish the photo taken that day of the mayor accidentally tripping as he steps up to the podium to give a luncheon speech?

Should a newspaper write about a city councilor who gets into a shoving altercation at a local bar, or report on municipal officials expressing concern about that councilor’s drinking habits?

If the police chief has defaulted on his mortgage, is that a news story?

For newspapers in smaller communities, questions about what will, and will not, be published tend to be amplified by the fact that community newspapers are so well read. And folks often know each other personally.

So, it could well be someone’s neighbour who is named in a newspaper report about a scandal, someone’s brother laid off at the local paper mill. It might be the hairdresser’s son cited in a sexual assault case.

The list of potentially sensitive issues in a small community is long, says Jim Pumarlo, who has 27 years experience working at two community newspapers in the state of Minnesota. He lists just a few delicate topics: “Teacher negotiations; public officials’ salaries; business layoffs and strikes; interviews with families of a homicide victim.”

There is no getting away from it, “in a small community, the stories you write about often concern friends, family, close associates of someone at your newspaper.”

But sensitive areas cannot be avoided at a local paper precisely because what makes the community newspaper so relevant to readers is its intense and comprehensive coverage of local news.

Pumarlo calls it, documenting the “living history of our home towns,” and describes reporters and editors as “the premier clearinghouse of information for your communities.”

His rule of thumb for handling sensitive news material is first, to develop a policy around what is to be reported and what is not. Second, to implement that policy. And third, to explain the policy – both to staff and newspaper readers.

Whether or not the policy is popular, he says, readers will appreciate that there are no double standards at the paper, resulting in different treatment for different individuals. Consistency and fairness are crucial in any newspaper’s coverage.

In developing a policy on which news is fit to print, an editor must consider such things as whether the issue is being talked about in the community and if it has a genuine impact on people.

For example, Pumarlo recalls the time that a decision had to be taken on whether or not to run a story about a high school hockey game, won by a local team, thanks largely to a backup goalie with zero varsity experience pinch hitting for a high school athlete suspended from play.

Clearly, it was be deeply embarrassing for the suspended athlete involved to see his situation in print.

But, says Pumarlo, “We regularly highlighted the accomplishments of individuals and teams in words and photos. We also considered it our responsibility to point out the shortcomings of real life.”

So why not report on the suspended athlete? He acknowledges, even with guidelines in place, such decisions in the end will always have a subjective component and should be determined on a case-by-case basis.

In the instance of the suspended athlete, things the editor might want to have asked himself include whether he would have sanctioned a similar report about a lead singer in a school musical being unable to perform due to laryngitis, or if he would have reported on a lead actor suspended for alcohol use, or poor grades.

In the case of the report about the athlete, the situation is best dealt with, says Pumarlo, “by a couple of sentences near the bottom of a story. And that’s probably the extent of the coverage, unless there are extenuating circumstances”.

Those who question the appropriateness of such reporting should be made to understand that editors were guided by a pre-established policy and did not make their judgment on a whim, says Pumarlo.

Another sensitive reporting scenario that Pulmaro confronted involved photographs from a fatal accident scene in the aftermath of a collision between a motorcycle and an on-duty city dump truck.

The motorcyclist was killed and the truck driver later was cleared of any wrongdoing.

Factors to be considered here, says Pumarlo, included the fact that an investigation would have to be carried out into the accident and the mishap had caused a large traffic backup affecting many of drivers in the community.

Most newspapers clearly would not publish gruesome photos at a death scene, or ones showing a victim’s body parts or blood.

In the end, the Minnesota paper opted to publish a photo of the truck driver, crouching and emotional, being consoled by a passerby – something that deeply upset the motorcyclist’s family members.

Pumarlo later wrote a column explaining his decision to publish the photo and met with the motorcyclist’s family members. The newspaper also ran a letter to the editor from the dead man’s sister, taking the newspaper to task.

“Accept feedback, good and bad,” he counsels.

Decisions about reporting on suicides also can be difficult, Pumarlo says, recalling deliberations over a report about a grade-school student who killed himself after being bullied, a trauma that affected the mood at the boy’s school.

The paper wrote it up in a short piece, “and that was the end of our reports [on the topic].”

Even for newspapers with a policy of not reporting suicides, some such cases cry out for coverage. For example, a person holding hostages at gunpoint who chooses to commit suicide rather than surrender. Or a mayor who takes his own life. Perhaps a bank president who has served on almost every community board in the town is found dead in his car, in a city parking lot. That might be a hard one not to report on.

Pumarlo’s newspaper had a policy of reporting the causes of all deaths not the result of natural causes, whether by drowning, due to a traffic accident or involving a shooting.

“One of your biggest challenges will be explaining why to report a suicide which occurred in the privacy of a home. But ask yourself: is it fair to report one suicide because it occurred in a public setting, but not another because it was in a private setting?”

Pumarlo holds that, “Suicides are the type of story that newspapers must report if they are to remain relevant in their communities.”

When it comes to news of a sensitive nature, Pumarlo believes it’s essential to be fair and accurate, prompt and sensitive to the story’s placement in the newspaper.

He advises reporters to know their rights under various laws and make certain, when officials cite laws allowing them to withhold information, that they are on firm ground and not just demurring because they are uncomfortable releasing sensitive material.

Policies about publishing sensitive information should be “under continual review,” and explained by one person within the newspaper organization, to ensure consistency.

Any sensitive news stories should be tested for accuracy and fairness, and for whether they are likely to have a short or long-term impact.

Other points to consider: will the story make a difference? Will it quell rumors?

The truth is, an endless amount of sensitive material regularly comes across an editor’s desk. Senior management must make decisions about how various items are to be handled, items that are, strictly speaking, newsy but not news stories.

For example, how should letters to the editor or wedding announcements be handled? Which survivors get listed in obits? Why are some government funding presentations covered while others are not?

With so many readers out there, someone is apt to be offended, on a fairly regular basis, by this or that coverage. Which is why it is so important to put policies in place, and be able to reassure readers that a newspaper’s decisions about sensitive material are always made thoughtfully and never capriciously.

Recap:

• Because small-town newspapers tend to write about stories that touch on extremely local events, their readers will be extra sensitive about any potentially embarrassing or particularly revealing material that gets published;

• Community newspapers need to have comprehensive policies in place to provide clear guidelines for editors on assigning and running stories that feature sensitive material;

• Community newspapers need to be bold and not shy away from sensitive material. The readership expects truth, accuracy and the straight goods in a local paper’s reporting on a small town.

• A single individual within a news organization should be tasked with explaining to the public the rationale behind such guidelines, to keep messages consistent;

• Things change over time in any community and the newspaper should be ready, when appropriate, to revisit guidelines governing the publication of sensitive material.