Ethical journalism?

[confustication]

At what point are you willing to put your relationships within the community at risk for a story?

I tripped into a story today that, if written, will be a statewide issue. I'm reluctant to write it as I know my editor will squash it, and I'd have to go over her head. If I do go over her head it will go into some pretty big papers (at least within the state) and is a very newsworthy story.

The editor likes to avoid ruffling feathers.

I believe in unbiased reporting, even when it does ruffle feathers and upset the status quo.

I live in a tiny town, and I risk alienating a bunch of people by writing about this.

Long-story short, state official knowingly committed fraud when she lived and worked here before her promotion to a high-ranking position within the state. It is a current issue, new circumstances having brought the unethical/fraudulent behavior to light.

Where do you draw the line, and when do you choose to sit on a story that really should be written?

[HybridVigor]

You have to weigh the risks and benefits.
Will you, your family or friends be socially OR physically harmed if you wrote this story? Would people throw bricks through your windows? Would powerful people put you on their black list?

If it needs to be told, and you feel that you are the one to tell it . . . perhaps you could convince your supervisor that it's a good idea?

I don't know what to tell you other than I believe that ethical journalism really important. Powerful people need to be accountable.

It's a tough choice, and I can't tell you to do it. I can say that I'd support your decision to go ahead and run the story, but I wouldn't want you or anyone around you to suffer consequences instead of receive thanks.

Would you let me know what you decide? In the meantime, I'll be thinking of your tough choice and hoping that you are guided to take the right path (whatever that may be).

[*MamaJen*]

Well, I've been a newspaper reporter (and now editor) for six years, and from a purely journalistic standpoint, it's a no-brainer. State official. Fraud. Taxpayer dollars. Yeah, write the story. Shining sunlight on government fraud is your basic bread and butter reporting.
I mean, this really gets to the heart of journalism. A free society needs a free press to monitor government and bring about as much transparency as possible. The public has a right to know what's being done with their tax dollars. That's your job as a journalist. I mean, if you want to talk about ethical journalism, it would be highly, highly, really really unethical to sit on a story like this because of your personal connection to the official. If you know about fraud and don't report on it then you, in a sense, become complicit.
Are your facts good? What are your sources? Have you asked this official what her side of the story is? Is there a chance that you're misinterpreting things? If you feel like the story is beyond your ability to write professionally, you could also tip off a larger publication and let them handle it.
I'd be interested to see you repost this in the working mamas forum -- there are a few other journalists there.

[beanma]

Originally Posted by *MamaJen*

If you feel like the story is beyond your ability to write professionally, you could also tip off a larger publication and let them handle it.

That's what I was going to say. For some people, personally, it would also matter what kind of fraud. I can't think of a good example now, but sort of along the lines of the poor mom who steals a loaf of bread to feed her starving kids vs the fat cat business man who steals from the poor people who barely have enough to eat.

If it's a really big story you might pass it along.

Of course there's also the "was young and stupid" angle, but now have reformed into an upstanding public servant — sorta like Bill Clinton and the trying pot thing.

You'll have to weigh these things and make a decision.

[MittensKittens]

I saw this from new posts - don't normally come here, as I am no longer a reporter. Normally, I believe that the public has a right to know and the journalist has a duty to inform. Your own safety, and in some cases national interest, do play a part in the decision making on whether or not to go ahead with a story. If it is your safety you are concerned about, and the possibility of alienating others, could you publish without a byline? (if the "others" you refer to means "editor", that won't do a lot of good, obviously ).

[*MamaJen*]

I have to say, the possibility of alienating others should have zero impact on whether or not to run a story. That simply does not enter into the equation of newsworthiness, not in any real news publication. Can you imagine if a capitol beat reporter decided to hold a story because it might alienate his buddy in Congress?
If you want to talk about ethical reporting, if you want to talk about the ethics and standards of the journalism profession, then that means honoring the public's right to know what is happening with their tax dollars. There is just not any gray area here.