Regardless of the people involved, though, there’s one aspect that nearly always goes unreported outside of features and profiles: The newsmakers’ behind-the-scenes behavior. To be honest, I often struggle with whether that’s a good thing or not.
I don’t know that readers understand how much time reporters often spend with their sources. Many journalists speak to and meet with the same people multiple times in a week — meaning they frequently develop a rapport, an understanding of each other’s character and conduct.
My question, then, for the readers: How should a reporter maintain objectivity when writing about a person who, for example, has a pattern of uncivil behavior behind closed doors, with journalists or others? Should the fact that the subject has shouted and cursed at the reporter in the past factor into the story in some way?
Does the answer change if it’s a public official, especially an elected one?
I ask because I’ve spoken with several newsmakers over the years whose conduct I found truly shocking. I recall a few phone calls from well-known names who have unleashed screaming, profanity-laced rants about stories in the paper involving themselves.
A few others can be extremely cordial and complimentary of The Star in a one-on-one situation, but later use press releases and the Internet to rake the paper over the coals for coverage they had just described to me as balanced and accurate. It’s sometimes truly bewildering.
I think that the public would get a much different — and frankly, more truthful — picture of some of these individuals if journalists wrote more about the behind-the-scenes aspect of news gathering.
I’m hardly the only person who’s seen this side of certain public figures, whose behavior is an open secret among the people who deal with them, including other journalists and the staff in their offices.
But that’s something newsrooms are loath to do, especially if the private actions don’t have any overt effect on the public.
And the subjects I’m thinking about keep themselves under control in their public appearances. Reporters can always describe mannerisms and actions in plainly descriptive terms, but I fear readers might still see that as tipping of the hat into subjectivity.
(And no, I’m not naming names. Suffice to say that they represent many facets of the political spectrum.)
So, are these omissions a failing of politeness on the journalists’ part? Or should the subject’s behavior be off the table, as it could certainly lead to what readers perceive as biased reporting? I think it’s an open question — and I look to the readers for guidance. Let’s take the discussion to my blog: adastrum.kansascity.com.
Join the discussion
Share your observations and experiences about news. Lively, open debate is the goal, but please refrain from personal attacks or comments that are racist, vulgar or otherwise inappropriate. If you see an inappropriate comment, please click the "Report as violation" link to notify a KansasCity.com editor. Thanks for your feedback.