Chapter 11 - Reporting for Duty and Kell's say

1. "Official inquiries have proven some police are corrupt" (Conley & Lamble, 2006, p.243).

If we take these words into consideration, I would publish the story.

The above quote, as used by Conley and Lamble, is justified by the fact police have threatened not to speak to the newspaper I work for if I publish the story. Think about this hypothetical situation: A young man who seems credible tells you that he has been bashed by a member of the public, no-one of notoriety just another citizen. The story is newsworthy (for the sake of this example!) - what do you do? Personally, I would publish the story.

The point of the hypothetical was it shouldn't matter who does the bashing, it should still be reported. The fact, in the question in our text book, the perpetrator is a police officer should not have any bearing on whether to write the story or not. I understand the newspaper could ultimately be alienated from future police reports, however given I (the journalist) have the support of the chief-of-staff I see no reason why not to publish it.

I also think this would give the paper more credibility and exposure. It would look worse if the paper was found out to have known about the bashing, but succumbed to threats by the police and ultimately not publishing the story.

Conley and Lamble do suggest newspapers who publish stories, such as a police assault, are discriminated against which can motivate a meeting between the editor and senior police.

I personally just believe in reporting the truth.

I understand from reading various chapters in our text, there are ramifications and various issues to consider before publishing a story, but I believe the best stories are the honest stories; no details left out to make the story sound better, or not reporting a story in the first place because it might make someone look bad! Perhaps they should have thought about that first!

Police in this instance can threaten the journalist not to report the assault, but they more than any other group in the community should be aware of the consequences of their actions.

Although it may also be important to remember "reporters rely more on police information than police rely on reporters", as Conley and Lamble quote. This is somewhat different from politicians who understand the "benefits of keeping communication lines open" (Conley & Lamble, 2006, p.244)

2. One of the restrictions on court reporting in Australian jurisdictions says that a magistrate "might agree to suppress the name of an accused, witness or victim. Sometimes defendants who say their lives and reputations will be ruined by publication of their names" (Conley & Lamble, 2006, p. 250).

It is also noted such requests are usually denied.

Given the crime in question was simply a conviction for stealing a pair of stockings, and if I didn't publish the story no-one would know about it, I would probably not publish it. Despite my newspaper's policy to publish all such cases.

If the woman really is suicidal, and of course this could simply be a threat, is it really worth taking the risk over reporting a conviction for stealing some stockings?! Imagine the media frenzy such a story could create! "Convicted stocking thief takes her life after local newspaper unnecessarily revealed her identity". Imagine how guilty I (the journalist) would feel if that situation occurred.

Surely there could be other news stories worth following that day to report on.

3. Report the incident! But I would probably refrain from directly identifying the personality. I would try and subtly write the story so the public knew who I was reporting about, but I would not directly report the name of the personality.

I would not accept any form of bribe, but would include the fact the personality wanted the story concealed and was willing to offer sex to money and a free holiday to do so.

Stories such as this are reported all the time, for example Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton. If the story is somewhat light-hearted, I don't think it would be so bad for the personality in question.

No-one was hurt and it is more just the point of embarrassment for the personality, so if the story was written in a light-hearted way, I don't see the harm in publishing it.

4. As Conley and Lamble quote Lomax, 'the press has a public duty....to inform the public on matters of public interest...'(p.255). I think this case is a matter of public interest and therefore, probably after consultation with my superior, I would report on the corruption as well as report the corruption to relevant authorities. The jurors involved should immediately be expelled from the jury and the police officers involved should be reprimanded.

I do not believe there is any room for corruption in a murder case. How would the victim's family feel, knowing they did not receive a fair trial? Is that fair?

On a personal note, three days ago I learnt that a previous workmate was found hanged in a resort in Indonesia, two days after his wife had given birth to a daughter and just before he was about to start a new job. There are many details that simply don't add up and most of us believe he met with foul play. However we also know Indonesia to be quite a corrupt country and therefore will probably never know if he did indeed meet with foul play. Imagine not knowing the truth. It's hard enough for his friends, how do his family accept it?

Conley and Lamble note that 'media coverage of inquiries on police corruption has undoubtedly affected relationships between police and journalists...' (p.244). So while reporting the corruption may have a detrimental affect in future police reporting, I believe the public has a right to know about the corruption. As does the family of the victim.

KELL'S SAY
May say for this week has been incorporated into question 1.