Opinions abound as readers respond

In this space last week, I asked for opinions on a couple reader

feature and on an ethical debate that was sweeping through newsrooms

across the country.

The reader features I wanted input on included our diary-style Guy

Hebert column on the Mighty Ducks hockey team and a car crash

reported as a poem by staff writer Deepa Bharath.

The ethical question concerned a newspaper in the state of

Washington that published a false story to catch a criminal.

This week, I’ll devote my column to the responses. Only Costa Mesa

resident Geoff West agreed to be named, so the rest will just be

classified as “a reader.”

Let’s start with the hockey column, which sparked some newsroom

debate on whether we should run something that has few local ties,

other than that Hebert lives in Newport Beach.

Here’s some thoughts from a young, optimistic reader from Newport

Beach:

“I am an avid reader of the Daily Pilot. The Mighty Ducks have

been a part of my life since I was 8 years old and I am now 14. The

fact that the Ducks are in the playoffs and have just defeated and

eliminated the Detroit Red Wings is absolutely amazing. I really

believe having Guy Hebert write the diary-style column is a great

idea. I enjoy reading his column and I hope I can continue to read it

as the Mighty Ducks make their way to the Stanley Cup.”

From avid Pilot reader Geoff West of Costa Mesa:

“I, too, pay little attention to the Ducks, although I have

attended one game. Hockey, like soccer, has just not grabbed my

interest. Plenty of action, not enough scoring. I’ve seen Guy’s

articles, but have not read any of them. I agree that this counts as

‘local’ and probably has found an interested audience. Unfortunately,

I’m not among them. Sorry.”

Here’s another perspective on the Hebert columns from a reader who

happens to be an elected official:

“Sorry, I didn’t read any of them. In priority, I read local news,

national news, regional news. I think of newspapers as sources of

info on what’s going on that may affect my life. This includes

gossip. Your paper is the closest thing we have to a small-town

gossip machine. However, observations of non-local events by people

with Newport-Mesa connections don’t do much for me. Steve Smith falls

into that category often. I’m not a sports fan, so Hebert had two

strikes against him already.”

And from another reader, these thoughts:

“When such things affect us as much as they must, then the

definition of ‘local’ has to expand to accommodate reality. Like you,

I am not a hockey fan, and I am an immigrant from Detroit -- but the

Ducks became my team last week, as the Angels always were and the

brave folks in Iraq and Kuwait. Not everything that happens in Orange

Country is ‘local’ here, but your selections have been very sound.

Keep it up.”

And finally these thoughts:

“As for the story concerning the Ducks ... it’s warm today and

it’s baseball season. Ask me next February (after Super Bowl).”

On Deepa Bharath’s poem regarding a man who fell asleep at the

wheel and crashed his car, here are some thoughts:

“The poem by Deepa Bharath was very creative, but perhaps might

have been better placed on an op-ed page.”

One reader left me a phone message saying she avoided poetry for

the most part but found Deepa’s poem a nice change of pace. Still one

reader said he and his wife had trouble with it:

“Poetry just demands a lot more time and concentration from the

reader, and (my wife) says that isn’t what she wants from a

newspaper. On the other hand, she wasn’t put off by the poem since it

came at the end, and she was able to get the story without spending

time on the verse.”

But my favorite response came from Geoff West who offered up this

limerick:

We don’t begrudge Deepa having some fun,

Since her great heart is second to none,

There are many things worse,

Than news presented in verse,

After all is said and done.

Finally, the most serious concerns came in regards to the ethics

of the King County Journal and its decision to run a fabricated story

at the suggestion of law enforcement as a way to catch an arsonist.

Here are some of the responses:

“I’d find myself very leery about believing anything even if I was

told later that it was done for a good purpose,” said one reader on

my voicemail. “I don’t know if the ends justifies the means.”

And from Geoff West:

“This is a much more serious issue. Even though their plan worked

and the criminal was captured, I think it was an unfortunate lapse in

judgment on the part of the editors of that newspaper. It is

difficult enough for journalists to do their jobs day in and day out,

trying to present accurate, well-written and timely information to

their public, without the cloud of suspicion hanging over them. This

subterfuge created such a cloud, in my opinion. If I were a

subscriber to that newspaper I would find myself questioning its

coverage now. I hope you and the other editors of the Daily Pilot

will not succumb to that kind of temptation if it is presented to you

in the future. Trust and credibility are very difficult things to

regain once lost.”

Here’s a different perspective from another reader:

“Would I trust a newspaper if they fabricated a story in order to

catch a criminal? Perhaps, if they printed the reasons for the

fabrication, whether it worked or not, in the same section of paper

the original story was printed, and, for more than one day. The more

important question is, should I trust a newspaper that prints stories

in its news section that give evidence to the writer’s bias or prints

facts that are misleading? Ethically, newspapers should print facts

in a balanced manner that allow the reader to more fairly develop his

or her own opinion. Bias on the part of the newspaper staff should be

restricted for the opinion section, if at all.”

And another said this:

“That is a very tough call on the King County Journal fake story,

that in fact prevented a serious crime. Initially it seems harmless,

well-intentioned, and actually working to good social result. But

then, it seems to betray the responsibility of the press to report

the truth. And finally, I’d probably bend that responsibility, as

long as full subsequent disclosure was made. But it still feels

uncomfortable.”

I also posed the fake story question to the newsroom staff and the

reporting staff was pretty much horrified by the thought.

One of the reporters, though, said she later went home to discuss

it with her boyfriend, and he had a different thought that could be

an interesting compromise. The following contains her comments that I

think nicely portray the debate that needs to happen more often

between the journalism purists and those who are open to different

ideas:

“He said: Why didn’t they just print up one copy of a fake

newspaper and deliver it to the guy in his jail cell? Wow. That kind

of really drives home to me how stuck I can get in thinking about

things from my own perspective. I was so wrapped up in seeing this

issue as one of journalistic ethics that I never thought to step

outside my little world view and take a practical look at the whole

thing.”

Thanks to all who responded and next week, we’ll tackle journalism

ethics.