Reporting on Racial Issues: Where Should You Draw the Line?

Nicholas Snider 

sniderwx@gmail.com

In today's world, where racial tensions are quite high, journalists will have many opportunities to cover large gatherings, including how they evolve over time. One of these opportunities arose a few years ago in Charlottesville, Virginia, where a rally was held in protest of the removal of a confederate statue. As protesters gathered, protestors from the other side began to gather. Tensions very quickly heightened, and violence broke out between the protestors (protesting the statue), and protestors (protesting the initial protests). Things escalated to a point where a car was driven into a large crowd, injuring and 28 and killing one.

Of course, this was a large national story that needed coverage, but it was difficult to cover without drawing attention to white nationalist groups that were involved in this incident. Giving these groups national attention would undoubtedly give these groups the attention they have been craving. Al Tompkins and Kelly McBride, journalists for Poynter, talked about the correct way to cover an incident like this--drawing attention to what occurred without antagonizing people who did nothing wrong, or giving attention to the white nationalist groups.

Picture source: https://joebalestrino.com/how-to-improve-google-news-stories/

"Instead of using subjunctive adjectives and unclear labels...describe what the protesters were doing." Doing this will clearly describe the situation without giving notoriety to the white nationalist groups. "The Unite the Right label...is too broad to use without explaining the word 'right' does not automatically include racism". While most of the people who participated in the original gathering were part of hate groups, McBride and Tompkins make a fair point that not all conservatives identify with hate groups like these, and in fact, would disagree with a lot of the policy these hate groups are trying to push. Using that label would likely further divide our society among political lines. All in all, in using language, journalists should be as specific as possible (without giving notoriety) as to what was going on.

McBride and Tompkins also talked on what images and sounds to use in covering events like this, saying "Bring context to the video you select...Chose images that accurately reflect the events as they unfolded". Providing context to any situation could diffuse further conflicts. Journalists should always make sure that their viewers have a context, and they can understand what exactly happened in simple terms. Finally, they discussed the times at which to use audio, saying "in covering the breaking news it is defensible to include language and loud exchanges from street skirmishes. But as time passes, the reasons to include this language becomes less compelling". As time goes on, you want to remember the people who were there saying no to the white supremacists, not the white supremacists themselves.

More events like this will be probable as more and more statues are removed down the road. It is up to journalists to minimize harm by covering a story in ways that don't cause more division, highlights the good people, and refuses to give clout to evil groups like the white nationalist groups that gathered in Charlottesville.