Decisions about today's front page
Part three of this week's appropriate-to-publish theme:
Late yesterday afternoon, our court reporter Jonathan Jones found a search warrant that described an investigation into a possible threat of school violence. As he and others began reporting, editors began discussing where and how to play the story in the newspaper. (We also had a discussion about how to publish online, but I'll save that for another day.)
The storyline is this: Police said that a Grimsley High School student, charged with breaking and entering an Army Navy story and found with knives, swords and a gas mask, "expressed interest in harming students." He also said that he and another student had talked about obtaining firearms. Neither has not been charged with anything relating to perceived threats at the high school.
Managing Editor Ann Morris led last night's discussion:
We had decided that the story was definitely worth the front page given its topic, but the question was: Where on the front page? Should it be the lead story, at the top of the page, with the biggest headline, or was that overplaying the story?
Those who advocated leading with it made these points: Students had admitted to police that they had discussed hurting classmates. Police had found a rifle and pipe bomb materials in one of the student's homes. With everything we know about Columbine and other school massacres, this is serious, scary stuff. Don't we have an obligation to the community to report this news prominently? If your child attended Grimsley, wouldn't you want to know? And, if nothing else, it would be widely read.
Those who advocated downplaying the story (including myself) argued that yes, of course, this is serious and scary stuff. But at this point no charges have been brought and no arrests have been made. These are teenagers, ages 16 and 15. Teenagers are known to talk about all sorts of things, including stupid, irresponsible things. But, again, no charges have been brought. Is it really fair to them to scream this story from the top of the front page?
In the end, that line of argument prevailed and we ran the story lower on the front page, but with the headline still visible "above the fold."
Given that, we then needed to look at the rest of the stories on the front page. The planned centerpiece photo was of a teenager driving his car and talking on his cell phone. It accompanied an article about a new state law restricting cell phone use by young motorists. While it was unrelated to the Grimsley story, the idea that readers might mistake the student pictured in his car as the student involved in the break-in was too real. So we held that story and subbed another photo.
I think we played it right, but these are the sorts of stories we worry about the most. (I was on the side of playing it large.) Ann is right: If you believe in youthful indiscretions and redemption, playing the story high on the page is troubling. The entire community is reading about him, forming opinions about a student barely able to drive. Of course, this was more than a youthful indiscretion. He is facing charges associated with the breaking and entering, but without his admission to police about possibly harming other students, that would not have merited more than a few paragraphs inside the paper.
Was our treatment fair?
Comments (8)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
You got it right. If the kid was really going to do it, would he really have admitted it to the police AFTER getting caught? Scenario screams: lost kid looking for attention, probably not a real threat. If police find out he's said such things privately to friends--"don't be in school Friday: we're blowing it up"--then the story goes above the fold.
And if involving a school other than Grimsley, then 4A or so.
Posted on November 30, 2006 2:16 PM
i know john and hes a good friend and he would never blow up the school, or shoot up the school etc. while he may be a bit disturbed he is not a villian
Posted on November 30, 2006 6:04 PM
My son was at Grimsley the day a student shot an assistant principal and later, tragically, himself. It was appropriate for the N&R to publish that story on page 1; it involved guns & other weapons, young people making threats, and like it or not, one of the best known Greensboro / Guilford high schools. It's news.
TTYTT, it's a lot more news to me than photos of babies who died. (A heartwarming and heart-rending piece, it was, but not "news" like this is news.)
Posted on November 30, 2006 6:36 PM
Michael, we've heard the same from several students. Hope you're right.
Brian, in an oblique way, it did occur to me last night that I was glad this involved Grimsley rather than Smith or Dudley. We would have published the story on A1 regardless, but had it been another school would have been accused of "putting only the bad news about us" on the front page.
Sue, TTYTT? I just asked my 17-year-old what that meant. We figured it could be "To tell you the truth." That it? And no, the baby photographer story wasn't news; it was a feature story.
Posted on November 30, 2006 8:16 PM
John would never. and the whole article should've been on A7. What about this Page kid who actually brought a gun to a school function and had drugs? just dismiss this b/c two kids "talked" about hurting people? and everyone knows every kid wants to hurt people at school[mainly geometrey teachers] but that doesn't mean we will. i think this was blown way out of the water. oh and just so News 2 and everyone else who's going to keep talking about this knows- it's Averet. not Ahhhhvert.
Posted on November 30, 2006 11:20 PM
John would never. and the whole article should've been on A7. What about this Page kid who actually brought a gun to a school function and had drugs? just dismiss this b/c two kids "talked" about hurting people? and everyone knows every kid wants to hurt people at school[mainly geometrey teachers] but that doesn't mean we will. i think this was blown way out of the water. oh and just so News 2 and everyone else who's going to keep talking about this knows- it's Averet. not Ahhhhvert.
Posted on November 30, 2006 11:24 PM
john would never. I agree with the blogger who indicated that the Page High School story on page A7 should have been on the front page,with the Grimsley (might have hurt Grimsley students)whould have been on the inside pages. Why blow something out more than it really is? Let's be "objective" please. It appears that the N&R is making their opinions known on the front page with the actual and factual nes being relegated to the inside pages.
Posted on December 1, 2006 3:25 PM
Always listen to your children, John.
Posted on December 1, 2006 4:14 PM