FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - A Warning about WSJ and Jane Costello
View Single Post
Old Aug 13, 2001 | 11:28 am
  #54  
essxjay
Original Member
10 Countries Visited
100k
Community Influencer
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 16,126
I second gregwiggins' post. Completely.

FTers, please reread this post if you are at all interested in the nature of reporting news. He is utterly accurate in his discussion of news reporting.

As a fellow journalist, I most vociferously vouch for gw's explanation below.


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by greggwiggins:
From the beginning, let me note that I am a journalist myself -- and that I've also dealt with Jane Costello of the Journal and she's one of the 'good guys'; both her reporting and her writing have always been comfortably within the canons of ethics of our profession. I haven't seen the specific story, but from what I've read here, that's also true in this instance.

Now Mileagerunner asked:

To which I'll concur -- when a reporter is talking to you in their professional capacity then you are being interviewed and the purpose of an interview is to get information AND quotes. The question "may I talk with you about this subject" includes the "may I quote you on this" question as well.

If you do not want to be quoted, either do not give the interview or use the magic words "this is on background" or "this is off the record."

There is a difference between the two -- "background" means the reporter can use the information to get leads to other sources or to confirm information already obtained from other sources but the reporter should not attribute it or quote from it. "Off the record" means a willingness to talk but nothing from the conversation can be used directly. Although hopefully an off the record conversation will give the reporter a deeper understanding of a topic that will help them research and write a better story using other sources that can be attributed or quoted.

Like any profession, there are both bad apples and plain incompetents carrying press passes. But most of us are not trying to manipulate either the story or the people we deal with. The goal of a journalist should be and usually is accurately conveying to the readers, viewers or listeners the "5W's and an H" they teach in J-school: "Who, What, When, Where Why and How."

If a reporter's copy comes out differently than you thought it would, that's what sometimes happens when a third person hears both sides of a story. Or, as the old reporter's axiom holds, 'you know you're doing your job right when both sides hate your guts.'

</font>
essxjay is offline