ETHICAL DECISION

This blog is to give you insight into some decision making processes in the news business.

Let's begin with a couple of basic rules:

1. We NEVER identify by name or picture or in any other way ... a juvenile charged with a juvenile crime.

2. We NEVER identify by name or picture or in any other way ... the victim of sexual abuse ... without the victim's decision to go public.

Now, despite stating : NEVER ... situations do change and therein lies an ethical decision.

Let's being with the general issue of identifying a juvenile suspect ... or a juvenile convicted of a juvenile crime. As I stated ... we don't identify; there are times when the juvenile's family wants publicity and desires to forfeit that cover. Also, there are times when a juvenile is charged as an adult ; that removes the blanket of cover.

Dealing with the general issue of identifying a sex abuse victim. Sometimes, the victim is an adult and decides to go public to tell their story so they choose to have their identity exposed. Sometimes, the victim is a child, and rarely is that victim identified; that creates another difficult issue if the case involves incest and the perpetrator is the child's parent; if we report the parent's name .. then the child is inadvertently identified. What if the child is found dead and later the kidnapper is also charged with raping the child? The victim is public as is the sex abuse crime.

That's a thumbnail sketch of some basic issues; now to two real cases from today's headlines.

The first involves 16 year old Devante Thomas of St. Louis who was the subject of an intense manhunt; he was suspected of shooting a police officer 3 times. In the beginning, police would just tell us they were looking for a juvenile, but when he wasn't found immediately, police released his name and picture; they wanted us to broadcast the identity because they feared he was armed and dangerous. So we did.

Then, Thomas comes forward and surrenders. Now, police were backstepping .. not using his name or picture.

As a News Director .. what would you do?

If you follow that first basic rule ... he is a juvenile and might only face juvenile charges; do you suddenly stop identifying him by name/picture? If he is charged as an adult ... the issue is easier because now you will definitely ID him.

Keep in mind ... for several Channel 4 newscasts and on our website ... we used his name and picture; other local news agencies did the same and of course by going on our website ... he went on the worldwide web.

So, he is clearly identified at that point. Now, can you take it back? Should you no longer ID him?

If you are the News Director: what do you do?

My answer is this. Originally, we broke the NEVER rule by police request for what appeared to be legitimate concerns for the welfare of others. Now that we have broadcast his name and picture ... there is no way to act as if we didn't.

It goes back to one of previous blog issues.

If you take a pillow case of feathers and scatter them from the top of the Arch ... there is no way you can come back tomorrow and find all the feathers.

So, once the seal is broken .... it can not be replaced.

Now, to the second case regarding sex abuse victims.

This real case happened on the same day we debated the Thomas issue; this one involved a young teenage girl who had been missing.

When her parents and police feared foul play ... we broadcast her picture and name ... trying to help find her.

Then, she is found alive, but there is concern that she was sexually molested by an older man.

News Director ... what do you do now?

She is a sex abuse victim ... not a suspect of any kind. Should we no longer use her name and picture; based on my analogy about the feathers ... you can't pull the information back.

My thought is this: True, you can not retract her ID ---- BUT again, this is a sex abuse victim; So, while she has been named and pictured ... we stop ... IMMEDIATELY.

Each of these cases can have additional mitigating circumstances, and other cases can be "thisclose" to being similiar and might have their own circumstances which could add other levels to be considered.

That's a quick primer on general and specific issues. What do you think should be done?

7 Comments

A.A. Brookes said:

I am a hometown girl and STL news stations always exploit African-Americans. The old adage somethings change but STL race relations remain the same..strained. Why???? Ethics don't play a part in this just ratings....and you definitely got that.

I equate your news reporters to used car salesman.... you will do or say anything to get a story...is it really that serious?

As for law enforcement I am speechless in their constant in-your-face coverage of this incident. I am definitely on their side, however they went over aboard in pumping fear into the public about this TEENAGER.

Please stop splattering is name all over the screen it is wrong and unethical.

Thank you.

July 27, 2009 10:48 PM

Melissa Jensen said:

all I can say is, I am glad I am NOT a news director!! Those are TOUGH questions and complicated answers!!

I have NEVER thought news 4 has crossed the line giving my family the news... Thank you!!

July 28, 2009 4:54 AM

Jeanne Pfadenhauer said:

Channel 4 followed protocol, and complied with standard procedure. The police requested that juvenile be identified by name for the safety of innocent citizens. Too much is done to protect the criminal. A juvenile with a gun; shooting at police officers is far from an innocent child.

July 28, 2009 7:21 AM

Don said:

Larry,

You and your team are one of the few news/journalism organizations I even expect to actually give any weight to the ethical issue surrounding instances of this nature.

Even better is that it always begins as a question of avoiding harm to any involved and never about ratings or "breaking" the story.

Your willingness to address your thought and decision making processes is additionally very admirable.

Your doing great as always, thank you for the care that you handle the events of the area.

July 28, 2009 8:47 AM

Laura Landmann said:

I agree with the news director's decision on both counts. In the first case, Public safety was an issue...the possibly dangerous suspect needed to be identified. In the second story, as a mother, I am sure I would beg the police to release any info possible to find my child.

July 28, 2009 12:19 PM

Frank Burkhardt said:

Larry,
This is a response to your interview with Russ Carnahan.
How or why did you let him dodge the question on would he switch to the Healthcare plan they plan on pushing on us? He never answered the question, he just went on about the plan not that he would welcome it for himself?
You then went on to the next question? I am disappointed.

August 7, 2009 2:28 PM

Anonymous said:

Larry,
I have to get this off of my chest.
Basically, no one of any color has the right to beat anyone!!!! The fact that the media gives people the chance to make it racial is where all of the problems start. If it wasn't brought up in the first place no one would go there.Why can't the media just talk about it without color? Why can't it just be told that two boys beat up another one over a seat on a bus?

I just got finished watching the brutal beating of a young man on a school bus. Many of the students did nothing or laughed. It is my understanding that everyone thinks it wasn't racialy motivated. We heard nothing from the young man who was beat or his family. We heard nothing from the boys who did the beating. So how do we know that for sure? If the tables were turned and it was two white kids beating a young black boy it would have already esculated into a racial attack. The boys family would have been on the news and the other family would have to be getting a lawyer to fight the lawsuit that would have been filed against them. If this isn't true for this particular time then I appologize. But in most cases that is what happens.
Have you talked to the other families or the young man who was beaten? Did you find out what caused it to happen? Was it the only seat left in the bus?
I just don't understand society today. Why does everything always come down to color???
Why can't you the media be the first step into stopping racism???? Why can't you report about people and not color. Dose the race really matter? Does it give you more ratings?
I am really interested so please feel free to answer.
Thanks

September 15, 2009 6:29 PM

Leave a comment

Name:

Email:

URL:  

Remember personal info?

Captcha:

Type the characters you see in the picture above.