Influencing the newspaper
Sunday's column: It starts with a friendly phone call, whispered rumor or "leaked" documents.
After some pleasantries, the caller asks if a story can be buried or outright killed. Or a disgruntled gadfly peddles rumors of bias because she doesn't like the coverage of a dogged reporter. Or documents, with color coded Post-It notes, land on an editor's desk and supposedly expose city officials.
All were attempts to influence our paper, all happened in the past year and none affected our coverage. It's not a boast; it's a sad commentary on how some people view journalism and their local newspaper.
I remember, when I was a reporter, a newly installed city manager, possibly the most thin-skinned government official I ever met, wanted to end what he felt was my continuing negative reporting. Most of the stories were about how council members, despite denials, were making decisions without the public knowing, including deciding to fire his predecessor and hire him.
So the well-connected executive told underlings that he had connections inside the newsroom and intended to stop my inquiries.
Another time, a school board member, upset at our coverage, came in and talked to editors and complained. The stories were solid and hammered him for making unilateral decisions, intimidating staff and generally making a fool of himself.
Later, he told other board members and school administrators that the stories would end because he had talked to my bosses.
Of course, the pronouncements soon filtered back to me. Both times, I told my editor what I heard.
He would raise his eyebrows and smile. Then he told me, both times, it might be a good time to get those stories I was working on, one about the city official and another on the board member, in the paper.
I know it doesn't always happen that way, especially at small, local papers like ours.
Outside and inside the paper, people are always trying to influence reporters and editors.
Not all are insidious attempts to mislead us, but some are. The task is to know the difference and act accordingly. Sometimes even the people who believe they are hiding their true agenda hand us a nugget of information we can use to find the truth.
It's the attitude we try to have here. We don't always get it right, but for the most part we do. And when we don't get it right, we admit our mistake, find out what went wrong and fix it.
We also try to make sure reporters realize that they and government officials or public relation spokespersons on good days are friendly adversaries and on bad days are just adversaries.
Those who don't get that shouldn't, and usually don't, last long in journalism or at least not here.
Edward Barrera is the Metro Editor for the San Gabriel Valley
Newspaper Group.
www.insidesocal.com/editors
no
You've got a little repeat 1st twp paragraphs.
Excellent read!
Thanks. It's fixed.
Dear Edward,
While I appreciate your commentary on the issue, I am not sure why you believe it is a sad commentary on how people view the newspaper. Certainly the coverage is influenced by many factors and people...local folks trying to influence coverage of their local issues seems to make perfect sense to me. Clearly, attempting to influence the paper with false information is wrong...and that is why reporter's must verify before running a story. That seems to be the policy of your paper and you are to be applauded for having good ethics, both professionally and personally.
In light of the tremendous workload placed on reporters today, the result can be a series of less than interesting articles...with coverage of more important and complex issues being overlooked. There will always be folks attempting to get coverage of an issue important to them or their area...that shouldn't be considered a bad thing, but a good thing. They help identify issues that may warrant a look....ultimately, the paper will need to continue to diligently verify information before publishing an article -but that is the way it should be.
ps..I have watched the paper's coverage improve over the last year or so...whatever you are doing, I think it is working.
Gilman,
I didn't mean all, just some. And I don't mean to sound as if we are keeping the hounds at bay, but sometimes it feels like it. When people, especially ex-reporters, attempt to mislead us for whatever reason, it sends me over the edge. But I'm easily outraged, so take that for what it is worth.
So, if you are not influenced by anyone, who killed the Garry Miller story?
When one is ready, it will go in the paper. Until then, there is nothing to print.