This is a peek behind the curtain into the decision-making process in our small newsroom. From time to time information that’s uncomfortable or unpleasant comes to us through news tips, public records searches, or word of mouth. When that information can be verified and validated, we have a decision to make: to print or not to print.
Occasionally, it’s information that — anywhere else — would be splashed across the front page with a headline in 72-point type. But we do things differently around here, and there are some legitimate reasons for those methods. What would be a no-brainer news story becomes a question of weighing the impact of sharing on the collective psyche. Is it information the community needs to know for the benefit of the common good or for their safety, or does it matter? If it’s an elected official or community leader, or someone tasked with handling public funds or who is in a position of trust, that’s a whole new ingredient to throw in the decision-making mix.
No matter what course we take, someone is bound to disagree, and there will be valid criticisms on both sides of the issue; considerations we’ve weighed long before pages have gone to the printer.
We don’t take these decisions lightly or with ease. There’s no joy in reporting on trauma, tragedy or trouble. But those things are part of the human experience, they are part of our shared story, and they are news, whether we like it or not. How and when we report on them is horribly subjective and every situation is different.
Sometimes news — like everything else in life — is not black and white, it’s smoggy gray.
By NIKI TURNER – editor@editorht1885.com
