Breaking News: Are We Causing Harm or Covering it?

Maya Morita

mm294318@ohio.edu 

Photo from: The Lowndes Signal

As a journalist, one is held to a multitude of both ethical and journalistic guidelines to aid the process of story coverage and publication. However, these guidelines often create dilemmas in where priorities should lie. Journalists are meant to serve the public by releasing timely and accurate information. Journalists are also meant to protect the public and those involved with these stories and minimize harm. These two principles may contradict one another in cases where there is breaking news. Breaking news coverage is dire to a publication, especially on social media. News outlets are expected to report every and all breaking news event. However, this need for breaking news comes with many harmful effects. 

One complication lies with the protection of those involved with the event. When reporting on breaking news events, journalists often cover someone's worst day. It is crucial to gain the perspective of the victims and survivors of these events, but not at the cost of their mental state. These people are often overwhelmed with a flood of strong emotions due to what they have endured, and a crowd of reporters with cameras and microphones may jeopardize the state that they are in. These people will be willing to talk most of the time, but journalists need to approach this subject compassionately. The article "Covering Breaking News: Interviewing Victims and Survivors," by the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma, discusses various ways to prepare for these interviews and guidelines on ethically performing them. The author explains that journalists need to "consider empathetic interviewing." That means that the journalist should not push for information and be respectful of things the victim is not ready to announce to the public. Ultimately, journalists need to remain respectful when interviewing victims to protect the subject's emotions and mental state.

   

Another complication lies with the excessive coverage of the perpetrator in breaking news stories. Journalists often publish an abundance of information on these people, which may negatively affect people. These complications surround covering mass shootings, one of which is that these stories motivate more perpetrators. That is due to the perpetrators' desire to be the main focus of public attention. According to a study done by Michael Jetter and Jay K. Walker, "a 2015 shooter who murdered two people live on air stated: 'seems like the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight" (Jetter et al., pg. 1). In addition, this excessive recognition can harm those with mental health issues. For example, many breaking news articles include information on the diagnosed mental disorders of the perpetrators and blame their actions on it. That produces a harmful stigma that everyone with those disorders will commit mass shootings. Ultimately, journalists need to take the focus away from the perpetrators within news stories to eliminate these dreadful impacts on the public. 

   

Lastly, journalists and publications have created a competition between one another to be the first to break the news to the public. That comes with various issues surrounding the truth and accuracy of a breaking news story. With this competitive pressure, many journalists are producing stories with inaccurate information. Often, situations are not fully developed when a breaking news story is published, resulting in the publication of false information. That has developed from social media to the public, providing a platform for journalists to release information almost immediately to the public. Additionally, this desire to be the first has eliminated the need for fuller, more accurate stories and focused on briefs with limited information. Although it is essential for journalists to be the first to release breaking news, it should not trump the necessity of truth and ethics.