By
Bob SteeleNelson Poynter Scholar for Journalism Values
“There but for the grace of God….” That was the subject line on an e-mail sent by a veteran journalist today to a Poynter listserv for our Ethics Fellows program. This journalist used that time-honored expression to reflect the angst many journalists across the land could be feeling given what has happened at the
Los Angeles Times.
The
LA Times has apologized for what appears to be a major journalistic and ethical screw-up. “A
Los Angeles Times story about a brutal 1994 attack on rap superstar Tupac Shakur was partially based on documents that appear to have been fabricated, the reporter and editor responsible for the story said Wednesday.” So reads the paper’s own mea culpa account detailing the failures that have produced “withering criticism.”
The
LA Times Shakur article was challenged by The Smoking Gun Web site, which said the documents were not authentic and that the Times had fallen for a hoax perpetrated by an unsavory, unreliable source.
The
Los Angeles Times reported that its top editor, Russ Stanton, “took the criticisms of the March 17 report ‘very seriously,’” and he has called for “an internal review of the documents and the reporting surrounding the story.”
And well he should. What went wrong and why? And let me suggest that much of the attention in that internal review should focus on how the quality control process at the
LA Times apparently fell far short. Here are some questions that might be asked in that internal investigation:
• Did the reporter on the story – Chuck Philips – have enough substantive conversations with his editor as the story was developing? When did those conversations take place?
• What questions was the editor asking the reporter? Were those questions rigorous enough given the nature of the story, the scope of the assertions and the weight of the accusations?
• When and how were the questionable documents obtained by the reporter?
• What process was used by the reporter and editor to scrutinize the source of the documents as well as the source(s) for other key pieces of information in the story?
• What process of verification and cross-checking was applied to various pieces of information provided by sources, including the documents that now appear to have been a hoax?
• Were assumptions made at key points that needed greater challenging? If so, why didn’t that happen?
• At what point were other editors brought into the process to weigh in on the methods of reporting, writing and editing the story? What expertise and perspective did those editors bring to the process?
• What questions were those editors asking? What questions were not asked that should have been asked? Why weren’t those other questions asked?
• Were there contrarians among those involved in the reporting and editing on this story?
• How and why were decisions made about presenting this story first on the
LATimes Web site and then in the newspaper two days later? Were those decisions driven by journalistic purpose or by other factors? Did those decisions affect the checks and balances process for vetting this story?
• Have recent cutbacks in staffing at the
Los Angeles Times and the loss of some veteran editors affected the quality control process on stories like this one? If so, how?
The editors and the top management at the
Los Angeles Times have a great responsibility to examine these matters rapidly and rigorously. What went wrong and why?
And, while that goes on, journalists at other news organizations across the land can and should ask similar questions of themselves about the quality control process in their newsrooms.
• Do we have a sound system of checks and balances that ensures we measure up journalistically and ethically?
• What are the weak spots in the way we work that could erode our journalism no matter how good our intentions?
• How do we improve our quality-control system so we measure up and we don’t find ourselves on the receiving end of “The Smoking Gun.”
The “There but for the grace of God” mantra resounds loudly when we see our colleagues stumble badly.
Please add your feedback: What questions would you be asking inside the Los Angeles Times
if you were part of the internal investigation of what went wrong on this story?
I'm going out on a limb here, but I have...
