The Big Story: To Break or not to Break?

Michael Kromer
mk428915@ohio.edu

In journalism today, writers have to answer the all important question when considering the 'big story:' to break, or not to break? Particularly in this case, there is a struggle to make a decision when it comes to stories dealing with sexual assault. For example, in the #metoo movement there is a struggle for journalists to balance helping those who have not had a voice, and ensuring that their story travels through the entirety of the journalists' process of vetting and cross-checking. 

Courtesy of Market Watch

On one hand, news outlets should feel obligated to lend a helping hand to all of the people that have suffered for so long and have had their stories suppressed by being paid off or settled with outside of court. But on the other hand, what if that individual's story isn't true? Reporting a story of such magnitude only for it to come back false, would be a huge blow to the credibility of not only that news outlet, but the media as a whole. As if the trust in the media isn't already low, falsely reporting sexual assault accusations could be catastrophic for the industry. However, as nothing more than a human being it would be incredibly difficult to listen to an assault victim's story and then tell that person that you cannot publicize their story. It is hard enough for individuals to tell their story to the media at all, let alone to no avail. Therefore, it is important for a journalist to look for stories regarding sexual assault, and it is important to listen to them. But when a story is found, it is also important to be certain that the story is true.

Looking at another massive sexual assault story, this broken by the Indianapolis Star, it was because of journalism that the world now knows about Larry Nassar. The story all started with one woman, who "was an ideal source for these kinds of stories," Fast Company said. In other words, she came to her interview with Indy Star prepared; she had medical records and could prove everything she said. So in this case, the decision to break the story for the Indy Star was easy. But getting victims to come forward is never easy, so how did they do it? In fact, the Indianapolis Star simply followed the journalists' code. They were extremely transparent with their readership and with the victims they interviewed. They were upfront and honest, and as a result, the gymnasts trusted the paper. So therein lies a lesson of its own: as a reporter if you are transparent and honest with all parties that you are involved with, then the audience, and the subjects you report on will be more likely to trust you. 

Overall, reporting on sexual assault and choosing to break massive stories against massively powerful and often famous individuals is always going to be inherently challenging. Journalists have a duty to serve their public, both with information, and by allowing them to feel heard, especially in their time of need. Without journalists, the people affected by the #metoo movement, and the gymnasts affected by Larry Nasser, would still be suppressed to this day. So it is very important to report the stories of those who have gone without a voice for so long, but it is also important to do it in a way that can maintain the journalistic process, so as to maintain the small credibility journalism still has.