Publisher resigns after reports he pressured journalists into covering his papers business partner.
I thought this was an interesting ethical story, it also quite interesting to think are the journalists equally unethical for reporting the stories they were pressured to write?
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/romenesko/149205/wall-street-journal-europe-publisher-resigns-after-deal-suggested-outside-influence-over-editorial-content/
I won't rush to judgment too quickly on this one since publishers - and editors and reporters - with some regularity push coverage toward people and institutions in which they have some interest, some connection. What looked nasty in this case was apparently that a contract existed that either said or implied news coverage would be forthcoming as part of a business deal. As for the reporters doing what the boss said - do this story even though it doesn't satisfy my notion of what we should be doing - that's what the job is. It would get murky if the boss pointed out that he was doing the story because he'd been bribed - if he rubbed the reporter's face in the impropriety of the thing. Bottom line: If I am going to imagine a reporter quitting in such a situation, I'm thinking it would be more of a 'straw that broke the camel's back' situation rather than the reporter quitting as a result of this particular request in isolation. Another angle: When it comes to doing stories for what some might call ulterior motives - I'm going to ignore cash changing hands - I'm guessing most publishers/editors/reporters rationalize that the story is a worthy story on its own terms, and the fact some personal connection brought it to your attention does not compromise it. Indeed, you might congratulate yourself on having an excellent set of sources who point you at worthy stories.
ReplyDeleterobertson