You be the editor
Let's say your court reporter has come across a pretty juicy divorce filing involving someone who, in your opinion, is on the borderline of being a public figure. That is, the person isn't an elected official or a public servant, but is part of the leadership of a well-known business and has what I'd guess is a moderate amount of name recognition. Your paper rarely writes about divorce proceedings because the truth is difficult to find in emotional he-said, she-said petitions and because there’s a salaciousness to them that's more akin to the National Enquirer than the daily newspaper.
But times have changed and the public appetite for celebrities gone wild seems insatiable. People who know the person and the company would be entertained, to be sure. But is that a good enough reason? Should you respect the privacy of the couple during a painful, none-of-the-public's-business trauma? Or is your policy about passing on divorce proceedings old-fashioned? Is this one more reason people are turning to other news sources?
Comments (5)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Gut reaction, no.
How will his divorce affect the masses? Unless it looks like this is somehow related to his/her business troubles or because of something like a drug addiction which may affect the company?s stock price and or its employees I don?t see the relevance.
I agree this type of thing is getting more and more attention from other pubs but its too tacky for the N&R in my opinion.
Brian
Posted on August 16, 2007 4:10 PM
Well, it's hard to know without reading the file. But I probably would advocate for writing about it.
I don't think divorces should be off limits just because they don't involve public figures. One of my favorite stories that I wrote at the N&R was about a divorce involving people who weren't considered public figures.
I'm a believer that newspapers often pass on stories that are entertaining and which readers would find interesting if only for the level of conflict. It's like the two little old ladies who were in that nasty fight over their trees that I was going to write about earlier this summer, until one of them passed away and then it seemed like it was inappropriate.
I worked at a paper that once refused to write about Tom Clancy's divorce because the publisher thought it was a 'private matter.' Still makes me shake my head. We had a copy of the file in the office though. Talk about salacious.
Posted on August 16, 2007 8:52 PM
Well, it's hard to know without reading the file. But I probably would advocate for writing about it.
I don't think divorces should be off limits just because they don't involve public figures. One of my favorite stories that I wrote at the N&R was about a divorce involving people who weren't considered public figures.
I'm a believer that newspapers often pass on stories that are entertaining and which readers would find interesting if only for the level of conflict. It's like the two little old ladies who were in that nasty fight over their trees that I was going to write about earlier this summer, until one of them passed away and then it seemed like it was inappropriate.
I worked at a paper that once refused to write about Tom Clancy's divorce because the publisher thought it was a 'private matter.' Still makes me shake my head. We had a copy of the file in the office though. Talk about salacious.
Posted on August 16, 2007 8:52 PM
Interesting comes up on the same day Pat Summitt, Tennessee Women's Basketball coach's divorce made the news.
I came across a pretty heated debate on why it isn't the media's business on a Vols message board I belong to and couldn't resist chiming in otherwise.
When it comes to divorces, there's a hard line between news and what's excessive gossip, but you have to take look at it case by case.
Posted on August 16, 2007 11:35 PM
Case by case, I agree, but in my mind it's pretty hard to make a case for publishing the story before a court finalizes the divorce. What if the husband and wife change their minds? That's one of the reasons I stopped publishing marriage licenses (engagement announcements from the family were another, different matter; this divorce case would be different, too, if the company or the couple announced it).
If the divorce has a high likelihood of breaking up a company, affecting many people's lives, I would be more inclined to go to press with it. However, I'd still be reluctant to publicize what's essentially a private matter.
FWIW, here's etiquette doyen Emily Post on the topic: "Whom do you tell about a divorce?"
"A. Tell those to whom it makes a difference. Tell your parents and close family and good friends. Tell your business associates only if they are good friends. Tell the landlord or superintendent and doorman if one of you is keeping the apartment. At times it is necessary to tell doctors and dentists if your children's bills are to be sent to the parent not in custody of the children, and it is wise to notify the school office and your children's teachers. It is important that they know of any situation that may have an impact on your children's behavior and school performance. Otherwise, it is not necessary to tell anyone. The situation will become public knowledge very quickly when one member of the couple moves out. The one who moves may have change-of-name and -address cards printed, and of course his or her Christmas cards will serve as announcements. A note may be added to them: "As you can see, Bob and I are divorced. Hope to hear from you at my new address."
"Under no circumstances should printed divorce announcements be sent out. It is in the worst of taste."
Posted on August 17, 2007 10:21 AM