kbm8795

Well, you should also blame the Republican Party for that Clinton scandal, because they battered away at that issue, leaked information to keep it going and sent out their own press releases to keep attention focused on the subject.

But I can agree to an extent about tact - I've seen insensitivity before in a newsroom, though generally it isn't deliberate. I remember the first time I had to cover a story where someone had died - and to get information I had to sit outside with the man's brother while the police were inside the house looking for clues of foul play. I probably spent over an hour with him, comforting his loss and yet being very conscious that I also had a deadline. I hated that - but I didn't speed the process up. Then again, Rich can probably tell you that police go through this situation a lot, and it's never easy. But you are perfectly right - there is never any excuse for lack of tact, especially concerning someone's grief. By the way, Rich - the officers and I were both real cooperative with each other that day...hehehe.

Now I'm not the sole world defender of the press, though it has been my profession. And I'm sorry that you need to blame us for reporting actions. After all, the media wasn't conducting the torture in that prison, but they also know your own unit isn't doing it, either. And they know the overwhelming number of troops there aren't conducting themselves badly at all.

At the same time, I know it can be frustrating - they have a job to do, and sometimes it has to feel like it's interfering with their own job. I know it's a hassle to have them hanging around, but in other ways one would think they've been helpful as a link to home. As I write this, I think of Diane Sawyer visiting troops over there and making sure the cameras got on as many soldiers as possible (including injured ones on the way home) in order to give families a chance to see their loved ones serving over there. They aren't over there to make your life difficult or to second-guess your movements or decisions. That whole embedded policy came from the military brass - not from the news organizations. The Pentagon wanted to prevent the media from adventuring too much on it's own, both for security and logistical reasons.

As for your Toledo example, I agree - it's a bad judgement call. And that is also something we have struggled with for years - trying to figure out what is appropriate, especially in images. Personally, I don't like publishing images like a woman falling from a burning building - especially if you know it might come out before the police have notified the next of kin. But you are right about the growing tightness of deadlines and "being first" - unfortunately, that accelerated after deregulation during the Reagan era. It doesn't excuse irresponsible publishing, and you can bet the editorial staff had a heated meeting about that issue.
There are some peculiar ethical issues in media that don't generally exist in most other professions. For example, if you saw someone set themselves on fire in a protest (an old Vietnamese ploy in the 1960's) wouldn't you grab water and put the fire out? And yet we saw camera images of those people doing that, meaning someone was rolling film while the act was going on. Shouldn't the film crew drop their camera and try to rescue the victim, even if it was a voluntary political protest act?

I remember being asked about that years ago - and I would have probably interfered and tried to save someone in danger. But there are probably some who wouldn't - think about that weird videotape we saw months ago about the guy shooting at his lawyer in California...and the guy was dancing behind this skinny tree - all on some passerby's videotape. How could someone hold a camera to capture an assault and possible murder and just keep rolling while the man keeps firing at the victim?

That becomes an issue in journalism, though. Do you lose your ability to attempt objectivity and balance if you interject yourself into the story? Do you rush out an EXTRA edition with a photo like that scene in Toledo without knowing if the police have notified the families yet? Do you show it on television with the helicopters hovering overhead filming ten minutes after the accident occurs, with injured or dead people just strewn around there?

But then, remember the images from the 9/11 planes crashing into the World Trade Center? The cameras on people rushing down the street, the collapse in front of all of us....people jumping from windows in the buildings? Should we have turned off the cameras and just reported from the newsroom?

You do raise some seriously good questions.

Dale Mabry

There is only one person to blame for the Clinton scandal and that was William.

If sense were common, everyone would have it.

4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

kbm8795

hehehe...I'm gonna start calling you "Dale Lewinsky Mabry"

Little Wing

I really don't think it was any of our business. I like my presidents all calm n relaxed with a cool head on their shoulders. Ms. Lewinsky was a consenting adult n I'll bet old Hillary was only concerned that it was made public.

Sean0621

Yeah I don't really have much love for political parties either. Politicians are on my lists, with lawers, and the media, along with 90% of the professors at college university. I still fail to see how 45% of a calc 2 class can be spent arguing about politics, it's freaking math for the love of God.

"The First Rule of Fight Club is, You do not talk about Fight Club."

kbm8795

Since I teach college now, I'd say my classes have maybe two political discussions each semester - but then, I teach communication. I have no idea how it could fit into a calculus class. . . My list includes televangelists, legislators who think they have the sole license to quote and interpret biblical scripture as an excuse for persecution, "reality" television, and people who bully others. Well, and students who don't turn off their cellphones during class.