The Truth
Discovering and reporting the truth about every story should be the objectives of every journalist. I started the Real Journalism Newsletter several months ago for the purpose of presenting basic rules and principles of journalism.
Journalism is not regulated by the government of the United States. That was the intent of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. First Amendment Annotated
Journalists (the Press) are to be free from government regulation (abridging freedom). However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a right or wrong way of doing journalism.
We’ve spent the last several months looking at the purpose for and process of doing journalism the right way. If you haven’t read previous articles, I invite you to look through the archives to read what came before. Everything written about journalism and journalists in upcoming newsletters will be based on those principles. Stories change. Journalists change. Managers change. Principles don’t change.
Recent newsletters have looked at what journalists should follow —
What’s next? It’s time to give journalists a grade for their work. Why would we do that? Because the majority of news consumers don’t trust today’s journalists. A recent Gallup poll showed that the majority of news consumers have given journalists a very low grade for trustworthiness. That should be a big concern for every journalist, every news manager, and every company that does journalism. [Pew Research About Trust In The News Media]
How can journalists and the people who employ them find a way to improve the public’s trust? First, journalists and their employers have to want to rebuild that trust. Second, journalists and their employers have to have a way to rebuild that trust.
As a former news manager, I found two good ways for journalists and their employers to do that.
Debrief Journalists
Audit Journalists
Debriefing Journalists
While there are various types of debriefing, the following definition works well for what we should do as news managers.
to carefully review upon completion — Merriam-Webster
to question someone in detail about work they have done for you — Cambridge English Dictionary
The review process can include one or more people. In my early years as a manager, I would debrief members of the news team (e.g. reporters, photographers, editors, producers, anchors, other managers) after a newscast or special project. We met in my office or larger meeting room — usually same day, but sometimes next day. In my later years I saw the wisdom of including everyone involved with a newscast or special project. That included the news team and members of the production team (e.g. directors, camera operators, audio operators, CG operations, graphic artists, etc). Having that many people involved in debrief sessions took longer, but usually paid dividends as everyone learned more about the purpose and process of newscasts. Everyone gathered in the studio and shared how things went from their personal and professional perspective.
Talking about a newscast in front of everyone is a very interesting (and insightful) process. It tends to promote honesty and accountability among team members. Managers have to be careful not to let the meetings become little more than complaint sessions that turn into rivalries among team members. Managers need to help bring the team together around the common purpose of reporting the truth in every story. Providing some snacks and drinks during the meeting also helps develop team unity.
I highly recommend debrief meetings for news departments. It’s an opportunity for journalists to express themselves to managers and other team members and learn how to do their jobs better. It’s also an opportunity for managers (e.g. news directors, executive producers) to share insights into real journalism with their team.
Auditing Journalists
Audit — a methodical examination and review — Merriam-Webster
Forensic Audit — an examination of financial records to find any illegal financial activity — Cambridge English Dictionary
Journalists and news stories can also be audited through a forensic process. While a forensic journalist is another term for an investigative journalist, auditing the way journalists cover the news is a different animal.
There is a difference between a forensic audit and an internal audit. While an internal audit usually deals with compliance, a forensic audit deals with legal issues. An internal auditor wants to know if employees complied with company policies. A forensic auditor wants to know if employees broke any laws.
Auditing the way a journalist covered a news story can be done internally or externally. News managers can perform their own internal news audits to see if a journalist on their team complied with company policies. They can also hire outside auditors to see if journalists committed fraud or broke any laws during their coverage. Most media companies have lawyers on retainer or access to lawyers trained in these areas. Some companies hold regular training sessions for journalists to keep them updated about policies and laws impacting their work in journalism.
I found it helpful to hold regular training sessions on policies and procedures, along with legal issues, on a regular basis for the news team. We also brought outside legal experts to the station once or twice a year for more in-depth sessions.
The need to do an internal and forensic audit on a journalist often arises when someone threatens to sue (or does sue) a station, newspaper or network because of news coverage. That’s when lawyers and their auditing team carefully investigate coverage timelines, reporter notes, recorded audio or video, newscasts, anchor scripts, etc. That helps the lawyers advise the journalist and the company on the best course of action in responding to a threatened or filed lawsuit.
Process and Outcome Evaluation
Part of a forensic audit is to evaluate process and outcome. In the journalism context of covering a news story, it would look something like this:
Process Evaluation — How is news coverage supposed to work?
Outcome Evaluation — Did it work?
Public trust is one measurement journalists can use to determine in evaluating the outcome of a news story. That would be part of “outcome evaluation.” What was the outcome of the process? Did news consumers see, hear, or read a news story that was true and objective (accurate and fair)? If not, why not? Was there a problem with the process? That would be part of “process evaluation.”
It should be important to journalists that they tell the truth about every news story, and that the majority of news consumers believe they are telling the truth. It is possible that a journalist could tell the truth about a news story and nobody believe them, but that’s not the intended outcome. Journalists should hope they have the ability to communicate the facts of their story in such a way that they demonstrate the truthfulness of the story.
If you do go through a journalistic audit in the future, you will see how intense the scrutiny can be — especially if a lawsuit is in the millions or tens of millions of dollars. As an investigative journalist who also managed other investigative journalists, I’ve been through several of these audits. Lawyers and investigators will look at everything a journalist does in covering a story. They will look at your process, then compare it to both company policies and normative policies presented by journalistic organizations and college journalism programs. They will compare every step of a journalist’s process to see if they broke any laws (criminal or civil) at any point.
If the journalist followed the processes and was truthful in his or her reporting, they will probably be okay. Some companies will settle with litigants even when a journalist has done nothing wrong, but at least the journalist will know they did their job correctly. Whether a communications company decides to settle a lawsuit or go to trial is a decision for top managers and their legal team. Whether a journalist does their job “by the book,” is their personal responsibility.
Summer’s Here!
I hope you will enjoy the beginning of a new summer season as children take a well-deserved break from their studies. Because many people will be taking family vacations during the next few months, I will email the Real Journalism newsletter every other week instead of every week. Have fun with the ones you love!
Next Newsletter
We’ll look at an example in the next newsletter of a BIG medical science story journalists have covered in most every country of the world. I hope what we learn will make a difference in how big stories like it are covered and reported in the future.
Comments Welcome
I hope these thoughts are helpful to you as a journalist or news consumer. Please share your comments and I’ll respond as quickly as I can. If you like what we’re doing in this newsletter, please let your friends know about it so they can subscribe.
Newsletter Purpose
The purpose of this newsletter is to help journalists understand how to do real journalism and the public know how they can find news they can trust on a daily basis. It’s a simple purpose, but complicated to accomplish. I’ll do my best to make it as clear as I can in future newsletters.