War is hell
"Why don't you guys just admit that you're against the war? That's all you ever print."
Good morning. That was my first call of the day yesterday. As I write his words now he sounds angry, but he wasn't. He was courteous and pleasant.
"Seriously," he said. "There are millions of Americans -- and most of your readers -- who support what we're doing in Iraq and support the president. By publishing this, you're just thumbing your nose at them."
On A2 yesterday -- A1 was all local -- we published an AP article on Rep. John Murtha's call for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Next to it, we published a Knight Ridder story out of Bedford, Va., that attempted to put some real people's voices behind what the article describes as "a reflection of the growing national uneasiness" with the war. Elsewhere, we also published an AP story about a Pew Research Center report that said that more and more Americans think the United States should mind its own business internationally.
"You know, that guy who wrote the letter to the editorthe other day had the right idea. If we want to get any positive news about what's happening in Iraq, we have to write it ourselves."
Nevermind that that letter was copied-and-pasted from the Internet.
I pretty much just listened. It's the rare exchange on this topic that generates much light. The conversation quickly veered from our coverage of the war to the politics of the war. He wasn't mollified that the editorial folks took former VP candidate John Edwards to task. "That did surprise me," he said. "Bout time."
I suggested that he consider a few things that I read in this analysis by Knight Ridder's Washington staff. He took me up on my offer to e-mail it to him. (Yes, we should have published it, too.) And he and I had a good exchange of ideas.
I told him not to judge us on one day's paper. I also told him that Murtha's call was the news of the day, just like the president's and the vice president's criticism of war critics got the headlines in previous news cycles last week. And the Pew study was reputable and interesting and supported the other story about the national uneasiness.
Particularly on a hot button topic such as the war, we strive to be as fair as we can. We know that readers have our coverage -- and all media -- under a microscope looking for bias. We hear from all sides, too. We make mistakes: imprecise word choices in headlines or different size photos of war protesters and war supporters, for instance. They aren't intentional, unless you consider deadline pressure, constraints of space and human error as part of the conspiracy.
The message any journalist would send is this: Information is power and the more information you have the better you can make up your own mind. But just because you've made up your mind, don't stop receiving new information. Something might come in that will cause you to change your mind.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I feel for you JR. My hate mail in Detroit has increased in volume and shrillness verging on libel, in direct proportion to the decline in Bush's approval polls.
I think some of these folks are a little confused. They don't seem to understand that becoming the loudest minority is not the same as holding a majority opinion.
Makes me glad I'm just an opinion blogger and not a journalist - citizen or otherwise.
Posted on November 19, 2005 2:12 PM
Mr. Robinson I am glad you wrote this entry. I had been planning on writing a letter to the editor but haven’t had the time and you don’t answer those so this gives me the change to hear back from you.
You state: “We make mistakes” and “They aren't intentional” (now I’m not sure if you are just talking about the New and Record or journalist on a whole, however if by own a whole we already know this to be false, Jason Blair is just one example in a long line) however to get to the point, you go on further to advise us to “don't stop receiving new information. Something might come in that will cause you to change your mind.” My question is this, how then do we receive knew information? Isn’t it only the information the journalist wants us to have? Here is my example
Now the letter I was going to right about was about this article: http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051112/NEWSREC0101/511110327 talking about the GTCC memorial on Veterans Day. I have to ask first how did the story come about, did the Political Science Club call and tip off the News and Record and you sent a reporter over to cover it? Or did the reporter read about it and decide to do a report? Those are two very big factors. Now what I would like to know is did the report do any investigative reporting or did the people involved in the project just talk and the report wrote the story from that? Here is why I ask, it is stated in the article: “Members of the college's Political Science Club spent more than two weeks printing, cutting and attaching the paper stars to wooden sticks, creating a tangible reminder of the sacrifices of American troops and to honor Veterans Day.” First opening paragraph, no bias just stating the facts. Then we move on to this: “"You can say 2,000” from Barbara Walls, now let’s see what is the first thing someone thinks about when the number 2000 is mentioned when anything war related comes up. That’s right that was the big number about Iraq deaths. So I continue reading, (you know because as you said I wanted more information even though I had already made up my mind about this whole article, even if I hadn’t known that Ms. Walls is “a pinko-commie lefty”, her words by the way, I was a student of hers) and come across this quote: “The "2,000 Stars Project" was initiated by Milo Irsula, a 25-year-old middle school education major at GTCC. Though personally against the war, Irsula said the event was designed to be non-partisan. "We want to respect the soldiers," he said, "but don't want to step on any toes with the issue." Now my first thought was did the report ask Mr. Irsula if this was designed to be non-partisan then why 2000 stars, what about the deaths in Afghanistan, Gulf War I, Korean War, WWI and WWII, Vietnam? And what about the millions of veterans wounded but not killed? Because isn’t the point of Veterans Day to honor ALL veterans? So wouldn’t it be fair to say that your reporter failed in her job to the readers, how are we to get all the information if that information isn’t given to us? The first paragraph of this article was very deceptive it led the reader to believe that a celebration of all our Veterans was taking place and reality is that didn’t happen.
So what I would like to know is how did the reporter come by this story, did the reporter ask the question of why if this is a celebration of “sacrifices of American troops and to honor Veterans Day” why then just 2000 stars, where is the stars for the test of the American troops and Veterans? Did the reporter ask, why if this is non-partisan why the 2000 numbers and why the names of just the Iraq dead, did they know there was still American troops dying in Afghanistan?
You maybe the advise you give to readers you should also give to your reporters because it seems that this reporter made up their mind and decided that the reader didn’t need any additional information.
I appreciate any response you might give. Thanks
Also, just out of curiosity how do you think verterans from other wars felt about this article?
Posted on November 20, 2005 1:46 AM
Your paper has made a big deal about this letter.
Its a shame you had a different view when you we printing the Downing Steet Memos and all the Cindy Sheeman letters word for word like they appear on the internet.Not to mention all the big oil letters. Also take a look at the one on medicare cuts in todays paper.Seems like my wife got this letter on her it e mail.You will also notice I did not get a reply, when I asked him what cuts. So I will ask you the same question! WHAT CUTS??
Posted on November 20, 2005 7:35 AM
Dog, I'm not sure what you're talking about. We've made a big deal about what letter? The one about the progress made in Iraq? How did we make a big deal about it? I'm also not sure what letter about Medicare in today's paper, but if it was a letter, I surely can't speak for the letter writer about cuts.
Trish, I'll have to get the specifics to your question about how the story came about when the reporter returns to work tomorrow. But I suspect we received a news release and pursued it because it sounded like an interesting Veterans Day celebration. We weren't trying to do an investigative piece on the organizers' motives or political view. In fact, the political views seemed transparent to me....the story told readers what one of the organizers thought of the war.
Should we have not covered it because there weren't stars for all the veterans who died in war? I'd say no, that they had 2,000 stars doesn't take away that they were trying to honor those who died in our current war. Was it a political statement, undoubtedly. But I think readers could recognize it for what it was.
My guess is that the opinions of veterans of other wars spanned the spectrum of viewpoints.
Posted on November 20, 2005 11:33 AM
Thank you for getting that information. By the way if my daughters’ school sent out a news release stating they were cutting out flowers to celebrate our Veterans would a News and Record reporter been on it?
How can your article show a “celebration of Veterans Day” when even you yourself state that the political views were transparent. Why does a celebration of Veterans Day need to show a political point of view at all? I was under the impression that Veterans Day was a day to honor those who served. Not about making political statements about the agreement or lackthere of, of wars. Don't citizens have 364 days out of the year to make political statements? Why then does your paper feel the need to make one on the one day meant to honor our Veterans?
“I'd say no, that they had 2,000 stars doesn't take away that they were trying to honor those who died in our current war.”
Excuse me Mr. Robinson, how many men and women have died in Afghanistan or is this war no longer current? I wasn’t aware that we had packed up and came home from Afghanistan, but I guess according to your view they have. Why try to make this into a memorial for Veterans, when it fact it was nothing more then a political statement against the war in Iraq? And if as you say the political views were transparent, why not be up and front about it in the beginning of the article, instead of pretending you are going to do a nice little piece about celebration of Veterans Day?
"Was it a political statement, undoubtedly. But I think readers could recognize it for what it was."
Yes they did, they recognized it for the liberal slant that is known to the News and Record. And I think this is why you are so out of touch with your readers. I suppose it is hard to see the other side of the fence when your back is turned to it. I’m sure that you feel deep down in your heart, this was just a nice little information piece with the added bonus of the political statement. However, ask your readers if this is the way they saw it. Have you ever thought about putting a poll up on the website, maybe a question of the day poll, ask readers what their opinions are or what articles they are interested in?
Just out of curiosity is there anyway to tell the effect of readership week from week? I would be interested to know how much your immigrant series is pulling in.
Posted on November 22, 2005 9:27 AM
Trish, are you saying that we shouldn't cover anything if the organizers have a political point of view? If, say, Elizabeth Dole had made a speech at a Veterans Day celebration in which she made supportive remarks of our efforts in Iraq, we wouldn't cover that?
That story was covered not because of its political bent -- we really don't have those sorts of tendencies -- but because it looked interesting and was different from the usual. (We would make substantially different news decisions if we really wanted to make a political point.)
And yes, had your daughter's school called to say it was going to plant a star marking the death of every serviceman in Iraq or Afghanistan or throughout history, we'd have considered writing about it.
Posted on November 22, 2005 12:15 PM