Mark Callahan, a Republican Senate candidate from Oregon, was kicked out of a newspaper's editorial meeting at which five different candidates were represented, four present in the office and one on conference call.
The Willamette Week, a small publication, brought the five candidates together in order to ask them a series of questions about their take on issues that will likely be brought before voters in the fall.
One questioner from the paper, Nigel Jaquiss, a 2005 Pulitzer prize winning writer, apparently wrote down the words blah-blah-blah in his notebook referring to the answers provided by the conference call candidate and Callahan called him out on it. Jaquiss said later that it was because the individual on the conference call deviated from the content of his question.
In any case, Callahan had been asked if he thought that climate change was real or a myth. He stated clearly, "A myth." He was re-asked the question and he again answered. Jaquiss asked him, "Where are you on the Easter bunny?"
I don't know about you but the whole tenor of the meeting was off. I can't imagine a setting where a reporter would behave in the way that Jaquiss did. Maybe he grew himself a much larger head since winning a major writing prize and sees himself as a bigger player in the room. Who knows, but it was offensive, off-base and unprofessional.
I've reported at literally hundreds of meetings over the years, whether as a news reporter or as an administrative assistant at The University of Akron. Sometimes the content of the meetings, particularly those involving students upset with a professor about something, hit nerves for me. Unlike Mr. Jaquiss, I always kept my notebook out of view of the individuals in the room, whomever they were. And ditto for when I worked for the newspaper. If anyone had been looking, I kept to the script in 99.9% of cases.
Right before Callahan was sent out of the meeting, a voice is clearly heard saying, "You already have two strikes." In other words, Callahan's behavior was being scrutinized with what certainly seems like the intent of finding something they didn't like. Who are they to judge? They are reporters. They are supposed to be right down the center of the issue. They are supposed to be YOUR eyes and ears.
Without sounding over-the-top, there are some things in life that I hold quasi-sacred. One of them is the world of journalism. I took my job very seriously and tried to conduct myself properly and professionally. One of the biggest problems we have in this country right now is that the "freedom of the press" that is one of our hallmark freedoms isn't very free anymore.
The individuals at this so-called editorial meeting of the newspaper had an agenda, quite clearly. Their job, in simple terms, is to use their eyes and ears and then write and report the news. It's not that complicated. The questioners, especially the one, were caustic, opinionated, disrespectful, callous, egotistical, and arrogant. It was a travesty.
If you get a chance, check out the exchange on the Internet. Start watching at around 1:06 minutes.
The paper is backtracking and trying to come out sounding reasonable. There isn't anything reasonable about throwing someone out of a meeting, especially someone running for higher office, with no better reason than they disagreed with him.
Disgust just doesn't cover how I feel about this situation.
What can we do about it? If you glimpse any hint of editorializing in the articles you read in the newspaper, let them know. If you have reason to talk to a reporter, listen carefully to the questions he/she asks to be sure they are fair and centered. If you see something skewed on the nightly news, go to their website and tell them about it.
The press is powerful, and in fact, the pendulum has swung too far in their direction as far as balance is concerned. WE are the ones who buy their product. WE need to exercise our own freedom and let them know when they err. WE need to remind them about the parameters of their job.
Thanks for letting me vent!!
Karen
No comments:
Post a Comment