WNC To Hold Hearing on Vitae Foundation vs. KUOW Complaint

***UPDATE*** we now have the hearing video and full set of documents involved with the complaint as a downloadable PDF. We also have national coverage by The Washington Times and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s Ombudsman. Plus local coverage in Sound Politics and the Northwest Daily Marker.

The Washington News Council’s Board of Directors has set a date for a hearing on a formal written complaint from the Vitae Foundation against KUOW 94.9 FM concerning a story that aired April 13, 2011.

The hearing will be Saturday, March 31, 2012, from 9 am-noon, at the University of Washington’s Communication Department, Room 120. It is open to the public.

You can download a PDF collection here to read the basic complaint and initial correspondence between Vitae and KUOW.

WNC Hearings Board Chair Karen Seinfeld presiding over the Sue Rahr v. Seattle Post-Intelligencer case

Karen Seinfeld, Chair of the WNC Hearings Board and former Chief Judge of the Washington State Court of Appeals, will preside at the hearing. (UPDATE 3/16/12: Former Washington State Supreme Court Chief Justice Gerry Alexander will be presiding in Judge Seinfeld’s place at the hearing.)

The WNC Hearings Board will be comprised of current and former WNC Board Members, including Martin Neeb, Scott Forslund, Shannon Myers, Bill Gates Sr., Steve Boyer, John Knowlton, Erik Lacitis, Charles Rehberg, David Schaefer, Paula Selis, Chris Villiers and Walt Howe.

The WNC recently received two grants from the Gates Foundation and Microsoft for 2012 operating expenses.

To see how a WNC hearing works, here is a link to a video and background information of a 2006 hearing in the Sheriff Sue Rahr vs. Seattle Post-Intelligencer complaint, held at Town Hall Seattle.

(The P-I chose not to participate in the hearing, which is their right as media participation is voluntary. They posted a 17-page written response on their website, much of which was read into the record by Judge Seinfeld at the hearing. Had they attended, they would have had full opportunity to “stand by their stories” in public, respond to questions from the Council, and make their case in an open forum.)

The WNC received the Vitae Foundation’s formal written complaint on June 9, 2011, and the Council’s Board of Directors accepted it for our process after careful review. The WNC’s Board unanimously agreed that the complaint raised “serious questions of journalistic performance or ethics,” which is our main criterion for acceptance. The Board takes no position on the merits of a complaint at that stage, however.

We notified both sides that the complaint had been accepted and began a 30-day resolution period, encouraging both Vitae and KUOW to seek a compromise resolution. WNC convened a meeting on July 14, 2011, at the WNC office with Guy Nelson, News Director of KUOW and Pia de Solenni, representing the Vitae Foundation. The resolution period was extended for another 30 days, and extended again through the end of the calendar year. Both sides were urged to continue seeking a compromise.

Following WNC’s three-part recommendation of a proposed compromise resolution, Guy Nelson did conduct a brief telephone interview with Debbie Stokes (CORRECTION: An earlier version identified her as “Debbie Nelson.” We regret the error.) of the Vitae Foundation on Sept. 30, 2011, and posted the transcript on the station’s website. However, the station did not acknowledge that the original story was incomplete and misleading, as they had conceded privately. Nor did they do an on-air story, which was part of the proposed compromise. Nelson said they would “seriously consider” doing a follow-up on-air story, which was part of our proposed compromise, but set no timetable.

The WNC tried through 2011 to mediate Vitae’s complaint, hoping that a satisfactory compromise resolution could be reached. WNC Board Members believed that a resolution was possible. However, in January 2012 it became clear that resolution was unlikely. More than six months had passed — far exceeding the WNC’s normal 30-day resolution period — and there had been little progress.

Under the WNC’s Complaint and Hearing Procedures guidelines, if the complainant is not “satisfied with the news outlet’s proposed resolution to the complaint,” a hearing date to air the issues is scheduled. Vitae was not satisfied with KUOW’s response and therefore requested a hearing. The WNC’s Board, after careful deliberation, agreed to set a hearing date.

A hearing is not a trial, but an open discussion of journalistic standards, which is healthy and helpful for both sides — and for the general public. WNC has asked both parties to submit final written statements by March 10 that include “any new information obtained or agreements reached during the process of trying to resolve the complaint.”

WNC’s Complaints Committee will phrase questions for the Council to consider at the hearing, identifying “which actions by the news outlet allegedly violated standards of accuracy, fairness and/or journalistic ethics.” Final wording of the questions will be shared with both parties and made public at least 10 days prior to the hearing.

One resource the WNC may use at the hearing is National Public Radio’s newly revised Ethics Handbook, which was just released last week.

WNC’s guidelines also state: “Parties may continue to try to resolve the complaint prior to a hearing, but if they do not reach a resolution before the day of the hearing, the hearing will proceed.” If the complaint is resolved to both KUOW and Vitae’s satisfaction by March 30, the hearing will be cancelled.

For further information about the complaint or questions about WNC’s process, contact:

John Hamer (206.262.9793)
President and Executive Director
Washington News Council
1201 1st Ave. South, #331
Seattle, WA 98134

8:30 a.m. – Doors open to Room 120, U.W. Communications Building, to public and news media. (Open at 8 a.m. to WNC Hearings Board)

9:00 a.m. – WNC President John Hamer welcomes attendees,
makes brief remarks about WNC complaint & hearing process.

9:05 a.m. – Hearings Board Chair Gerry Alexander calls hearing to order, asks all Board members to introduce themselves

9:10 a.m. – Opening Statement (15 minutes) by Vitae Foundation

9:25 a.m. – Opening Statement (15 minutes) by KUOW

9:40 a.m. – Rebuttal Statement (5 minutes) by Vitae Foundation

9:45 a.m. – Rebuttal Statement (5 minutes) by KUOW

9:50-10:30 a.m. – Questions (40 minutes) by WNC Hearings Board

10:30-10:45 a.m. – Break

10:45-11:30 a.m. – Discussion (45 minutes) by WNC Hearings Board members (questions of Vitae and KUOW only to clarify issues)

11:30 a.m. – Chair Alexander asks if either party wants a brief recess to reconsider positions or eliminate questions. If so, action is taken.

11:35 a.m. – Closing Statement (2 minutes) by Vitae Foundation

11:37 a.m. – Closing Statement (2 minutes) by KUOW

11:40 a.m. – WNC Hearings Board votes on written ballots, which are counted by WNC staff. Vote results announced by Chair Alexander.
Hearings Board members confirm their votes by show of hands.

12:00 p.m. – Hearing is adjourned by Chair Alexander.

Share

Students nationwide sign up for TAO of Journalism program

Tao of Journalism signup 2012

The staff of the Eagle's Eye News at Ruskin High School in Kansas City, MO takes the TAO of Journalism Pledge during Scholastic Journalism Week, Wed., Feb. 22. They were one of 20 student groups across the country to take the TAO Pledge last week.

Student journalists from across the U.S. took the TAO of Journalism Pledge during annual Scholastic Journalism Week, Feb. 19-25, promising to be Transparent, Accountable and Open (TAO) in their work as journalists. Student journalism groups are invited to take the TAO Pledge at any time, but Feb. 22 was set aside as National TAO of Journalism Pledge Day.

As the TAO of Journalism enters its third year, the momentum grows as more professional journalists and student journalists take the TAO Pledge and carry the TAO Seal on their work. It is a way to help instill public trust.

“We are trying to hold ourselves more accountable,” said David Gaines, newspaper adviser at Moffat County High School in Craig, CO. “This seems like a great way to make a pledge; let others see that we have made a commitment, and then hold each other to it!”

Congratulations to the following student media groups who have made a public commitment to be Transparent, Accountable and Open (TAO) in their work:

Mane Thing (newspaper)
Arlington HS — Riverside, CA

The Golden Word (newspaper & online)
Cibola HS — Albuquerque, NM

The Spoke (newspaper) & Stoganews.com (online)
Conestoga HS — Berwyn PA

The Image (yearbook), Pirate Press (newspaper) & DPNews (broadcast)
Dos Pueblos HS — Goleta, CA

Tiger Topics N the Red (newspaper)
Fishers HS — Fishers, IN

The Buzz TV
Fort Mill HS — Fort Mill, SC

The Spectacle (newspaper, broadcast, online news, yearbook)
Mesa Vista HS — Ojo Caliente, NM

The Blue Print (newspaper)
Moffat County HS — Craig, CO

OTVX (broadcast)
Oldham County HS — Buckner, KY

Overland Scout (newspaper)
Overland HS — Aurora, CO

Pirate Press (newspaper), ECHO (yearbook), PattonvilleTODAY (Online
News)
Pattonville HS — Maryland Heights, MO

Premier (newspaper)
Premier Learning Academy — La Marque, TX

The Echo (newspaper & online)
St. Louis Park Senior HS — St. Louis Park, MN

The Raven Report (newspaper)
Sequoia HS — Redwood City, CA

The Eagle’s Eye (newspaper)
Ruskin HS — Kansas City, MO

Smoke Signal (newspaper)
Stafford HS — Falmouth, VA

The Oracle (newspaper)
Steinbrenner HS — Lutz, FL

The Hawk (yearbook)
Susquenita HS — Duncannon, PA

The Yell-Kat
Yellville-Summit HS — Yellville AK

By taking the pledge, the student media listed above will be sent the TAO of Journalism Seal to post as a public promise to practice ethical journalism.

Congratulations to all participants!

Kathy Schrier, M.Ed., MJE
Washington Journalism Education Association
and
Washington News Council / TAO of Journalism Project

Share

How to hold TV news stations accountable – a letter from reader Bill Santagata

TV remote control and static -- post imageFrom time to time we receive correspondence from fellow news junkies outside of Washington State, and sometimes overseas as well. As the last fully operating news council, we’re starting to show up in search engines for people who need answers on accountability in the news media. A fellow named Bill Santagata wrote to us asking for advice on how to reach out to his local television stations in Rhode Island. Bill writes:

For the past couple of years I have been growing increasingly more and more irritated at the shoddy quality of our local television news stations here in Rhode Island. Their coverage is disproportionally — if not exclusively — dedicated to stories of no civic importance, namely nonsense “human interest” stories and house fires

We pointed Bill to a number of useful resources, i.e. the savethenews.org petition to the FCC on better local TV dislcosure practices (possibly not still current) and a survey to report the state of local TV coverage in your community. Noting that a Pew Research poll shows that around 70% of Americans say they rely on their local TV brands for information, the Journalism Accelerator held a series of forums on the value of local TV, featuring a number of experts, including Steve Waldman, who authored the FCC’s version of The Information Need of Communities.

We also suggested Bill write a letter to his stations. The response he got was minimal. Bill writes:

One newsreader suggested I write to the news directors, which I suppose is fair advice. I had another newsreader again say she would be more than happy to help. I gave her the questions, and like before, haven’t heard from her since. I sent a follow-up e-mail several days ago with the first newsreader who said she’d have to check with her boss, still no response for her.

While I am not at all happy with the quality of my local news, I’d also like to point out that I am by no means being mean or condescending to the newsreaders I’m contacting. I genuinely do want to hear their input, and I would be more than appreciative of the time it would take them to answer these rather in-depth questions.

Below is a full copy of the thoughtful, well researched letter that he sent:

1. In the 9 June 2011 FCC report “Information Needs of Communities,” the FCC has found that the flourishing of national and global news information on the Internet has left a “shortage of local, professional accountability reporting.” This has resulted in a “shrinking coverage of munici- pal government around the country [which] raises the risk of corruption and wasted taxpayer dollars” because “citizens [are] more dependent on government itself to provide accurate and honest information” (345, 47). [Read more...]

Share

Seattle student press rights hanging in the balance

Seattle area students and advisers meet Nov.8 to celebrate and discuss future plans.

by John Bowen and Kathy Schrier from the Washington Journalism Education Association to the Student Press Rights Commission blog

Principals will not have a chance to prior review Seattle School District journalism students because the school board recently withdrew its proposed and controversial policy change.

“As a former journalism teacher, it is important for me — as I know it is for our Board — that we uphold our practice of trusting our teachers to educate our students on the rights and responsibilities that come with freedom of expression and a free press,” Interim Superintendent of Schools, Susan Enfield, a former journalism teacher and adviser,  said in a press release.

Supporters of the existing free expression policy will now have a year to convince the Seattle School District board to keep its hands off and continue to encourage students to make final decisions and have responsibility for content.

During the first week of November as part of a system-wide policy overhaul, school officials announced they would seek to change a 2o-year policy of allowing students to make final decisions of content without prior review. The Washington State School Directors Association had recommended the new policy.

Washington students, advisers, media groups and citizens mounted a public and active four-day campaign reporting about and speaking against the policy change.

The press release indicated the school district would revisit the issue in 2012 to see how a policy change might fit with community values.

Students and supporters met Nov. 8 to celebrate and plan

Student journalists from five of Seattle’s high schools (Ballard, Garfield, Nathan Hale, Roosevelt and West Seattle) met Nov. 8 in the Nathan Hale journalism room to debrief following a promise by Seattle interim Superintendent Susan Enfield to leave unchanged the district’s current student press rights policy. The meeting followed a four-day, whirlwind campaign to thwart the passage of Policy 3220, a controversial, restrictive student press policy.

The students came together to celebrate the immediate victory, as well as to talk about how they must work together to make sure this doesn’t happen in the future. The discussion focused on how the district policy-making process appears to be badly flawed, especially since some school board members seem to be ready to approve policies they haven’t even read.

Students plan to create a Facebook page and a website to keep in touch with each other, as well as to co-produce an article and possible insert about procedures used to decide policies in their school district. Students hope to run the piece in all their papers at about the same time. A coalition of Seattle student journalists is now in the works with plans to meet regularly.

Applauded for their efforts in fighting back the passage of Policy 3220 were Katie Kennedy and Kate Clark, Ballard High School editors, who went on the attack with community flyers, letters to school board members and on-air interviews with local talk radio hosts.  The group also applauded NPR reporter Phyllis Fletcher, KPLU-FM Seattle (who was in the room covering the meeting), for first discovering the proposed policy change and alerting Mike Hiestand of the Student Press Law Center, who in turn contacted the Washington Journalism Education Association.

Fletcher shared how she discovered the information on the policy. She explained how, as part of  her regular preparation for covering upcoming school board meetings, she looks at the agenda and tries to become familiar with the items for consideration. A red flag went up when she discovered the language in Policy 3220 under consideration.

Clearly, her quick action made all the difference in preventing its passage.

Garfield High School adviser Casey Henry shared with the group a late afternoon message to Seattle journalism advisers from Susan Enfield, in which she apologized for the “consternation” caused by the whole ordeal and promised to make sure any future revisions to the scholastic press policy in Seattle  will include input from media advisers.

Students in the room added  they should be included, as well, and intend to make that known to the superintendent and the board.

This was a close call for student journalists in Seattle Schools, with lessons to be learned about staying vigilant. In fact, the students discussed creating a session for the 2012 National JEA/NSPA Spring Convention in Seattle, a case study on four frantic days for student journalists and their supporters in Seattle that fortunately ended positively.

Coverage from Seattle-area media

Announcing the proposed change
• Stop the presses, let the principal check them first
http://www.kuow.org/program.php?id=25002
• Seattle school board moves to censor student newspapers
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/11/seattle_school_district_moves.php
• Proposed Seattle school-newspaper policy raises censorship concerns http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016707090_censorship07m.html
• Students say Seattle school board threatens censorship
http://www.mapleleaflife.com/2011/11/05/students-say-seattle-school-board-threatens-censorship/

Announcing the withdrawal of the proposed changes
• Seattle public schools beats hasty retreat
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/11/07/seattle-school-district-beats-hasty-retreat/
• Students say school board ‘setting the stage for censorship’
http://www.myballard.com/2011/11/04/students-say-school-board-setting-the-stage-for-censorship/
• Proposed ‘censorship’ policy for school newspaper withdrawn (Ballard High School)
http://www.myballard.com/2011/11/07/censorship-policy-proposal-for-school-newspapers-withdrawn/
• Ballard High newspaper editor-in-chief Kate Clark on her censorship fight with the Seattle school board
http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=577&a=35563
• School board withdraws controversial proposal: free speech maintained for students
http://my.hsj.org/Schools/Newspaper/tabid/100/newspaperid/4554/view/frontpage/Default.aspx
• Seattle public schools withdraws controversial student newspaper oversight proposal
http://today.seattletimes.com/2011/11/seattle-public-schools-withdraws-controversial-student-newspaper-oversight-proposal/
• Schools back off on policing student papers
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016713513_censorship08m.html
• KUOW-FM late afternoon story/interview with Ballard editors Kate and Katie
http://www.kuow.org/mp3high/m3u/News/20111108_PF_freepress.m3u
• The Stranger
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/news-clash/Content?oid=10654053

Other coverage
• How Seattle journalist got school censorship scoop
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/als-morning-meeting/152652/how-seattle-journalist-got-school-censorship-scoop/
• Seattle school board pulls controversial publications proposal, will revisit in 2012
http://www.splc.org/news/newsflash.asp?id=2292
• Seattle School District seeks to remove forum policy for prior review
http://www.jeasprc.org/?p=4150
• Seattle school board pulls controversial publications proposal, will revisit in 2012
http://www.jeasprc.org/?p=4150

Share

National Newspaper Ads: Neither ‘Smart’ nor ‘Sexy’

Image posted at: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/romenesko/140127/thumbs-up-or-thumbs-down-newspaper-slogan-smart-is-the-new-sexy/ See if you can find the newspaper in the ad

The Newspaper Association of America (NAA) has just unveiled a new national advertising campaign whose slogan is “Smart Is the New Sexy.”

Huh? Whose idea was this? And what was the “Old Sexy” anyway? Dumb?

If they’re hoping to attract more newspaper readers and advertisers with this marketing come-on, it’s pretty lame.

The NAA developed a cartoonish “self-promotional” advertisement that about 2,000 daily and weekly newspapers nationwide will use in print, online websites and in social networks, or so NAA is hoping.

It features a skinny (geeky?) young woman with green hair and glasses sitting at a table with a cup of coffee. Does she look smart or sexy to you? If so, you need to get out more.

What might be a newspaper is sitting on the table – although it could be a placemat. On it is a dark blob that may be a headline, a photo – or spilled coffee. A vase of orange flowers provides….what?

Out of her head spring three thought bubbles – one with a tablet, one with a laptop and one with a smart phone. However, it’s not clear that any of them are open to newspaper websites. How smart is that?

“We want to remind people that newspapers are still the greatest source of news in the country, and to equate the reading of newspapers with staying informed and being smart,” Mark Contreras, former NAA board chair, told Editor & Publisher magazine.

The NAA’s strategy is to show that newspapers, far from being dead or dying, are still a major source of news, information and advertising even though their delivery systems are increasingly digital.

“The real story is that the medium is still relevant and robust, particularly print,” Contreras told E&P. “It’s gotten an unfairly bad rap over the past five to six years.”

That may all be true, but these ads are not likely to help. Besides, the slogan is borrowed from a “Big Bang Theory” TV episode in 2009, so it’s not exactly fresh.

Here’s an alternative ad-campaign proposal, offered to NAA free of charge as a public service.

If newspapers want to be “smart” and “sexy,” well, what are some elements of both that we can all agree on? Think of your own personal relationships. How about if newspapers adopt these three sure-fire attractants:

Transparency – Be totally open about who you are. Reveal your values, your goals, your motives and your biases. Don’t hide or dissemble about where you’re coming from. Don’t be phony or disingenuous.  You’ll be totally alluring.

Accountability – Admit it when you’re wrong. Apologize. Ask for forgiveness. Don’t be defensive, arrogant or vindictive. Show a little humility and vulnerability. Promise to try harder next time. You’ll be completely endearing.

Openness – Seek others’ opinions and genuinely value them. Ask for advice from those whose love, respect and loyalty you’re trying to earn. Take their suggestions to heart. You’ll be absolutely irresistible.

If newspapers practiced all those principles, they’d be much smarter and way sexier too. And it just so happens they can. It’s easy:

They should all embrace the “TAO of Journalism,” which means “the path” or “the way.” They should take the TAO of Journalism Pledge and display the TAO seal in print or on their websites.

The seal features the ancient yin-yang symbol, which represents the primal male-female bond, among other things. We also have some temporary stick-on “TAOttoos” that people can put anywhere on their bodies. They last for a week or so before they rub off…depending on where you put them.

This is an approach that could really turn readers on: Let’s just TAO it!

Share

Journalism Needs More Ombudsmen AND News Councils

Craig Silverman gives keynote speech to #ONO2011 meeting in Montreal. John Hamer of WNC (bald spot on left) listens along with Michael Getler, ombudsman of PBS (bald head on right).

“It’s really important that we have accountability mechanisms in journalism. When it comes to our own accountability, most news organizations are doing a pretty poor job, to be blunt.”

Craig Silverman, in keynote speech to Organization of News Ombudsmen (ONO) annual convention, Montreal

Craig Silverman, a regular columnist for Columbia Journalism Review and The Toronto Star, is also author of “Regret the Error – How Media Mistakes Pollute the Press and Imperil Free Speech.” 

In his talk to the world’s ombudsmen last week, Silverman cited several studies which found that 40 to 60 percent of news stories contained some kind of error! A comprehensive survey of U.S. newspapers found the highest error rate on record.
“We’ve been telling people for literally hundreds of years that when we make a mistake we correct it,” Silverman said. But the U.S. study found a correction rate of only about 2 percent.

“That is pretty outrageous,” Silverman said. “If we’re only correcting 2 percent of errors, we’re not meeting our own standards. It represents a serious failure on the part of news organizations.”

“Reporters will be inclined to not want to run a correction, because they’ve been trained that that’s a bad thing,” Silverman said. “They need to change that attitude.” He’s right on both counts.

What’s more, errors are “now forever,” because they are cached online, and spread worldwide by Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc., Silverman noted. Dealing with complaints about errors is one of the jobs of news ombudsmen – and also of news or press councils.

I joined the Organization of News Ombudsmen as an associate member last year, partly because I love the acronym – ONO! – but also because the Washington News Council is a kind of “outside ombudsman” for news media in this state.

Unfortunately, there are no full-time ombudsmen at any news organizations in our state anymore. That’s too bad. Over the years when I was at The Seattle Times, they had four different ombudsmen. A couple of them were pretty good. I edited their columns, which ran on the editorial pages.

Ombudsmen hear and respond to complaints from readers, viewers or listeners about news stories that are arguably inaccurate, unfair, imbalanced and/or unethical. That’s also what news or press councils do – and what we have done for the past 13 years.

Some say ombudsmen – since they are employed by the news outlets, have offices in or near the newsrooms, and generally know the editors, reporters, and producers – can deal with complaints more effectively. Of course, since their salaries are paid by those they are hired to critique, some also may question their level of independence. But most try to be fair, thorough and constructively critical. Many do criticize their own newspapers, broadcast stations, and/or websites strongly – and they’re often not too popular in newsrooms.

Also, the number of ombudsmen around the world has declined over the years – especially in the United States. ONO now has about 60 members worldwide, with only 20 in the U.S. Many media organizations say they simply can’t afford the position anymore, when they don’t even have enough reporters to cover their local communities.

Ombudsmen’s jobs have been eliminated at many American newspapers in recent decades – including at The Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. At the same time, some of the best American newspapers – The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today – have created or enhanced the position, although some are called “public editors” or “reader representatives.” There are also experienced ombudsmen at most major broadcast news outlets worldwide. In this country, only PBS, NPR and now ESPN have ombudsmen.

Jeffrey Dvorkin, former NPR ombudsman who now is executive director of ONO, told his colleagues in Montreal: “The ombudsman’s job is like being on the front lines of the First Amendment…We’re in between the public and the editors. We point out the warts and flaws. The [news] organization doesn’t want to hear it. We’re speaking truth to power.”

Jacob Mollerup, the current president of ONO whose title is “Listeners and Viewers Editor” at the Danish Broadcasting Corporation in Copenhagen, wryly described the job as “a lonely hell.”

He was only half joking. ONO members often say they have “the loneliest job in the newsroom.” Most journalists don’t like to hear complaints about their work and are reluctant to make corrections or explain their performance in public – which is what they always demand of those they cover. Double standard? Unquestionably.

The annual ONO conference is an opportunity for attendees to come together, swap stories, compare tactics, and commiserate with others who are in the same boat. Three days of panels, speakers and “shop talk” – with a few dinners and receptions thrown in – clearly have a therapeutic effect.

A draft business plan, sent out in advance and discussed on the final day of the gathering, notes that ONO’s first goal should be as a “meeting place and discussion forum.” The Montreal conference, for the first time, was simultaneously translated into English, French and Spanish, which was a great help to all.

Another goal is outreach – promoting ombudsmanship in cooperation with partners around the world. That includes to “be a serious partner in media projects where different organizations join forces in order to promote media accountability.”

A third is to expand the organization: “ONO should welcome members of independent press councils as associates.” I was invited to speak on a panel at their convention last year at Oxford University on how ombudsmen and press councils can work more closely together. And Mollerup recently attended the Alliance of Independent Press Councils of Europe (AIPCE) conference.

A final goal is to keep an open mind for new projects and ways of promoting media accountability – including in cyberspace. That’s precisely what the WNC has been doing for the last few years, and I shared some of our ideas with ONO members:

  1. Report an Error. Silverman and Scott Rosenberg of MediaBugs have developed a new online “Report an Error” system now being used by about 100 news sites and blogs. The WNC has been working with them and we now have the “Report an Error” widget on this site. We invite readers to report errors in Pacific Northwest media as we test this intriguing new system.
  2. NewsTrust.net. We also invite them to nominate and review state and regional stories on our NewsTrust.net widget. You must register to become a reviewer and it’s a great tool, especially to praise high-quality stories.
  3. Online community.  People may join our online community and begin participating in discussions of various topics. Our groups have grown steadily.
  4. Online Media Guide. We’re also developing a new Online Media Guide (OMG) for Washington news and information sources, which will be a valuable resource for journalists, public-affairs professionals, politicians, academics, etc.

One of the most interesting speakers in Montreal was Guy Amyot, executive secretary of the Press Council of Quebec. His council, unlike some others in Canada and elsewhere, hears complaints about print, broadcast and online news media, not just newspapers.

“It is the liberty of the press to be independent from any power structure, but because of this freedom they have to be accountable,” Amyot said. “The media are not obliged to name ombudsmen and are also not obliged to join press councils.” But, he strongly suggested, they should do both. He’s absolutely right.

In order to maintain public trust and credibility, all those practicing journalism need to be more transparent, accountable and open. Ombudsmen and news councils can clearly help – if more journalists would only listen.

Share

Who Do You Trust? Not the media, despite all our efforts….

SHEESH! Maybe we should throw in the towel….

The Washington News Council’s mission since 1998 has been to help maintain public trust and confidence in the news media. But today trust in the media is at record low levels. We’ve failed!

We were just named “Organization of the Year” by the Municipal League. But perhaps we should give the award back. All our work seems to have been in vain.

That was clear from a depressing Seattle CityClub conversation last Friday (April 22) in the Rainier Tower. The topic: “Who Do You Trust?” The answer: No one trusts anybody very much.

[Read more...]

Share

Student journalists “Go TAO” during National Scholastic Journalism Week

Journalism students at Whitney High School (CA) take the TAO of Journalism Pledge.

Student journalists who practice ethical journalism and want to assure readers, viewers and school administrators of their commitment to excellence, are going public by taking the “TAO of Journalism” pledge .

The TAO Pledge asks journalists to promise that they will be “Transparent” about who they are and how the story was developed; “Accountable” for, and willing to correct any errors; and “Open” to other points of view. This idea, introduced by the Washington News Council, is gaining traction with media organizations around the world. Student journalism organizations may take the TAO Pledge for free, while professional journalists are asked to donate $25 per year to help support the TAO Project website. Media organizations are asked to donate $50 per year.

The Journalism Education Association has endorsed the TAO of Journalism Pledge as one way student media can instill trust in their programs.

JEA encourages schools and student media to sign the Pledge during Scholastic Journalism Week on Wednesday, Feb. 23 and to invite their school administrators to sign on, as well. Any student media group who “takes the TAO Pledge” will be listed on the TAO of Journalism website with a link to their website.

Students can then post the TAO Seal in their masthead and they will receive a poster of the TAO Pledge that can be displayed as a public reminder of their commitment.

Once students take the pledge, they need to be sure to follow the pledge to show their schools and their communities the importance of professional standards.

• BONUS for student media groups who take the TAO Pledge during Scholastic Journalism Week: Temporary tattoos of the TAO seal for all members of the staff.

Share

WOO-HOO! We met the Gates Foundation Challenge!

Photo by Kslavin on Flickr available here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kslavin/1019160565/#/

The Washington News Council met the Gates Foundation’s Challenge Grant target by raising $100,000 in total donations by the deadline of Jan. 15, 2011. We received the Foundation’s matching check for $100,000 in the mail this week. We are extremely grateful to the Foundation for its continued generous support of the WNC and our important work.

This news is especially welcome because we recently learned that the Minnesota News Council, which was the model for the Washington News Council when we were founded in 1998, is closing its doors after 40 years. The MNC’s president, Tony Carideo, told the National Newspaper Association’s paper (January 2011 issue) that an inability to secure adequate funding and a decline in the number of complaints were primary factors. The council’s former executive director, Sarah Bauer, told me that she would move into the offices of the Minnesota Newspaper Association, which founded the MNC, as its program director.

Over the past 40 years, much of the MNC’s support came from that state’s newspapers and other media outlets, including local television stations. However, their funding declined severely in recent years due to the financial problems of the news industry in Minnesota.

In contrast, the Washington News Council was not founded by or significantly funded by news organizations when we began. We invited news outlets to join us and help shape our council, but nearly all declined. Instead, we sought and received funding and support from foundations, corporations, associations and many individuals — and thus did not rely on media donors (which some might consider a conflict of interest in any case).

Still, the WNC did copy the MNC’s by-laws, guidelines and procedures when we formed. We flew their then-director, Gary Gilson, to Seattle in September 1998 for our kick-off breakfast at the Washington Athletic Club. Gilson and I personally visited newspaper publishers and editors in Seattle, Tacoma, Longview, Vancouver and Spokane to tell them about the WNC and encourage them to participate. We pointed out that public accountability through an independent outside citizens’ organization such as ours could help increase their levels of credibility and trust. Most did not see that then, but many have since come to agree. Even some major media leaders who initially opposed the News Council have since written us checks, co-sponsored our events and supported our scholarship program. We thank them!

We are sorry to see the MNC go, but are glad to report that the WNC is now stronger than ever. We have just matched (for the second year) a $100,000 Gates Foundation challenge grant to sustain and expand our activities in 2011 and beyond. We have diversified our funding sources and redesigned our website. Our online community is growing steadily. Our TAO of Journalism pledge and seal is gaining adherents nationally and globally. Our new OMG (Online Media Guide) for Washington state is in the advanced beta stage. We are active participants in the Journalism That Matters organization, and I am part of JTM’s guiding “Collaboratory” group. We have now awarded 22 scholarships to students statewide. We recently held our 12th annual Gridiron West Dinner, an entertaining and successful “toast/roast” of five former Mayors of Seattle, and are planning our next event.

When I ask people if a news council is still needed, with all the new and easy ways of responding to the news media on the Internet, through comments, blogs, hyperlocal websites, Facebook, Twitter and other means, they tell me: “You’re needed now more than ever.” Why? Because if someone or their organization is damaged by inaccurate, unfair or unethical news reports, online digital response mechanisms may not be enough. The News Council is still here to help review complaints and provide recourse to those who are damaged by media malpractice. Our phone continues to ring with calls from potential complainants. In some cases, we counsel them on how to obtain corrections, clarifications and/or apologies. In some cases, we mediate compromises with the media outlet. In other cases, we may hold a formal public hearing. Increasingly, we are taking our complaint process online — such as in the “virtual hearing” we held on a complaint from Secretary of State Sam Reed against KIRO7 Television. (Citizens upheld the complaint by overwhelming margins in a series of online votes.) Our website features a “Washington NewsTrust” section where the public can nominate and rate news stories, and we’re working with Scott Rosenberg of MediaBugs to make his innovative bug tracking system applicable to Washington state news media and give citizens another new feedback tool.

Moreover, while the MNC’s demise means we are one of the only remaining news councils in the United States (New England and Hawaii have smaller but similar groups), respected and robust press councils exist in many nations around the world and their number is growing. Last year we joined the Association of Independent Press Councils of Europe (AIPCE), which has several members (like us) outside of Europe. (See their website for a full list.)

The Minnesota News Council inspired us to form and their closure is a loss for Minnesota citizens and journalists. But we’re alive and well, and committed to our mission of promoting excellence and ethics in journalism. As an article in the same January issue of the NNA’s paper put it: “Washington News Council reinvents itself on the Internet.” They got that right, and we will continue to reset, reboot, recreate and reinvigorate ourselves. If you believe that high-quality, accurate, ethical news media are vital to democracy, join us!

Share

David Gregory visits the “Other Washington”

David Gregory, Moderator, Meet The PressSomeone (probably a journalist) once said: “Journalists make the best company.”

David Gregory, host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” and longtime NBC White House correspondent, certainly was “good company” when he spoke to about 500 people at Seattle’s Town Hall on Sept. 21, at an event sponsored by CityClub.

(Full Disclosure: The Washington News Council was a co-presenter of the event, so I got in free, had an information table in the lobby, and handed out invitations to our annual Gridiron West Dinner. Was I co-opted? You decide.)

Gregory was charming, funny, engaging, informal, low-key, down-to-earth, sometimes provocative and occasionally enlightening. Just the kind of guy you’d like to have over for dinner — or at least have a glass of wine or a beer with.

Before a crowd of fairly friendly fans, being “interviewed” onstage by Jean Enersen, KING5’s iconic anchorwoman (who asked mostly softball questions), Gregory seemed to relax and enjoy himself.

Known as “the firebrand in the front row” when he was covering President
George W. Bush as part of the White House press corps, Gregory is now staking his claim as the likable-tough-guy successor to Tim Russert on “Meet the Press.” Like Russert, Gregory regular nails his guests with embarrassing quotes and clips from their past, demanding that they explain themselves on the air before a national audience.

But I sometimes wonder whether Gregory – or any journalist, for that matter – could stand up to the same kind of tough questioning about their own job performance. How solid were their decisions under pressure? What mistakes did they make? What biases influence their work? Do they confess when they are wrong and apologize? Do they ever show humility? Journalists love to hold others publicly accountable, but who holds them publicly accountable?

Enersen’s first question set the tone for the evening. Noting that Gregory was “so tall” (he’s 6’5”), she asked: “Why not the NBA? Why politics?

Gregory quipped: “I could have played baseball, but I just fell a little short.” (Laughter.) “My career in journalism started out with a love for the news….I wanted to cover the world and was really drawn to the big stories.”

Enersen asked if he “missed being the firebrand in the front row?” Modestly, Gregory said: “No. I did it for a long time.” Then he declared: “This [Meet the Press] is the ultimate front row. This is the ultimate job….We try to set the agenda. We try to move the story forward. We try to make news – and we do.”

In response to Enersen’s pretty bland questions, Gregory had some pretty bland answers:

On the economy: “This is not just a downturn…. There’s a deep psychological wound…. It may be a generational change….I think there’s a lot of people who are angry….People are just really uncertain….There’s a lack of optimism, a fear of the future.” (Anybody disagree?)

On the Tea Party: It’s a “populist, conservative, small-government, anti-Washington [D.C.] movement,” upset with “bailouts” and “too much deficit spending.” Also: “And a real antipathy toward Obama that in some cases is racism.” (Easy to say. Any clear evidence?)

On Barack Obama: “Certainly President Obama is not as popular as he would like to be – or as he was expected to be.” Gregory said Rahm Emanuel told Obama that he “had to get close to Bill Clinton,” and Obama did that. “President Obama is not going to be big enough to call on President Bush all that often.” (The guy he blames for everything?)

On political “polarization”: “We’ve always been polarized,” and that is “compounded by a media culture that has become increasingly polarized….I just don’t feel like constructive engagement with the other side is something that’s celebrated anymore….There’s a big political center in this country but we tend to write them off.” (This from the “firebrand in the front row” whose current show delights in conflict?)

On the media’s role: Meet the Press’s mission is “accountability, relevance, constructive engagement, thoughtful discussion. It’s a place to ‘put it all together.’” But, he lamented: “There ought to be more outlets where we’re really listening to each other, not waiting to pounce. We don’t have enough intellectual spontaneity. I like to see people really wrestling with issues.” (But what would that do to the ratings?)

On the “other Washington”: “I think that the farther you get from Washington [D.C.], the more things get clearer….There’s a game in Washington [D.C.] – it’s a company town: the lawyers, the journalists, the lobbyists, and the politicians….People outside Washington [D.C.] say, ‘That’s clearly not working.’” (Aren’t they right?)

On his work/family life: “I do have a certain amount of flexibility, because as my wife says, ‘You only work one hour a week.’ I like to point out that there’s at least three or four hours more that go into that.” (Actually, the guy probably does work pretty hard.)

On the Blogosphere: “I like to see what the Zeitgeist is in that community, but even with millions of people it’s a limited community. It can be an echo chamber. It can be partisan in one way or another….Is there some good reporting that goes on? Of course. But there’s also a whole lot of crap. It’s not a monolith.” (He’s right about that.)

On being well-informed: “We are in an information age where there’s so much information out there to be an informed citizen….There’s still a lot of good journalism that is helping us to be well-informed.” (Absolutely right about that.)

The Q-and-A session, when people lined up at a microphone to query Gregory, had some interesting moments.

On Jon Stewart’s upcoming “Rally to Restore Sanity”: “He’s a comedian, but he’s also got a point of view. I think what they do is serious. It’s not a joke.” However, “They are part of the media polarization.” As for Stewart: “He asks tough questions. He does a great job. I admire him a lot.” (Would he say the same of Glenn Beck?)

On former Associated Press (CORRECTION: Thomas worked for United Press International, and then for Hearst Newspapers) writer Helen Thomas: “I think Helen lost her way. I don’t know when that happened….I thought she was miscast as the ‘dean of the press corps.’ She was a polemicist. Her views in the press corps were well known.” (Oh, really? Then why weren’t they reported somewhere? Shouldn’t journalists “watchdog” each other, especially if one is anti-Semitic?)

On the “gotcha” tapes that he uses on the show: “I really don’t see those as ‘gotcha.’” (Oh, come on, David! That why people love the show!)

On Afghanistan: “American prestige is on the line” along with “the fate of radical Islam….If you allow Afghanistan to become a failed state again, all kinds of bad things could happen. The question is, at what cost are we going to keep pursuing it? We have a long history in that part of the world, but we have been incredibly short-sighted. We’re going to have a big combat presence there for a long time.” (Give him extra points for candor.)

On his personal politics: “I’m a registered Independent.” (And that settles that.)

On being in Seattle: “An evening like this for me is really constructive….The common sense outside of Washington [D.C.] is real.” He said people often ask him, “Aren’t you embarrassed that you’re working in a town where so little is accomplished?” (No.)

Will Gregory take any lessons back to the “other Washington”? Who knows? Once they’re inside the Beltway, journalists tend to fall into the same predictable patterns, conventional storylines, easy stereotypes, gross oversimplifications, crass sensationalism, and incessant scandal-mongering that have made many people angry…at the press.

Maybe D.C. journalists should get out more often. Meet the People, for a change.

Share