Character Assassination: The new News/Police Dynamic

Blake Dava
BD078813@ohio.edu

"News reports often headline claims from police or other officials that appear unsympathetic or dismissive of black victims. Other times, the headlines seem to suggest that black victims are to blame for their own deaths, engaging in what critics sometimes allege is a form of character assassination." -The Huffington Post

2016 is only the most recent year of questionable police killings in the past decade. But the past few years' events have drastically changed the relationship between the police and the media. 

Ever since the widely televised events of Ferguson, Mo. back in 2014, the police have become hesitant in releasing information to the media for fear of negative backlash from the stories. And the rise of protests stemming from the wide-spread "Black Lives Matter" movement have only increased the negative publicity, which makes this potentially small rift even larger. 

Brian Collister, an investigative reporter, began gathering research on the killing of Sandra Bland; a black woman who was killed by an officer after being pulled over for a traffic violation. 

When he approached the Texas Department of Public Safety "they didn't budge," said Broadcastingcable.com. "The Texas DPS stalled for four months before giving Collister what he wanted."

Eventually, the information Collister received was used to expose the state troopers for skewing the stats by disproportionately recording some of the Hispanic drivers they stopped as white. 

This difficulty in information acquisition is only one of the many problems coming from the unstable relationship between the news and the police. And some police are stepping forward to say that their hesitancy to share information is warranted.

"Everyone who is watching it is watching it with their own baggage, their own set of circumstances, their own set of experiences, and with jaundiced eyes," said Seattle assistant police chief Perry Tarrant. 

Certainly there are situations that warrant a withholding of information, but there have been clear attempts to hide the more corrupt sides of the police. Any argument that information should be hidden in order to avoid public scrutiny should be immediately dismissed. It is the job of the reporter to inform their audience, and to do so from an unbiased perspective. To avoid objective reporting to prevent subjective interpretation is unethical as a journalist.

Also, when police only release certain information on a criminal, or a victim, or a potential threat, it shapes the stories the news can put out. When a story focuses on the negative aspects of a shooting victim who happens to be black, or focus's on the positive traits of a white victim, the story is guilty of character assassination. The story begins to either justify or nullify the events by influencing the readers' opinions of the victim.

In this problem, the police are certainly responsible, but the media is also to blame. It's arguable that focusing on highly negative or positive social aspects of the victim's life can create a more sensational news story. The media's an equal contributor to character assassination.

As a journalist, I believe that our job is to keep those who have power in check. If the police wish to make the acquisition of information difficult, than they're simply only making things worse for themselves. Journalism should not give into this trend, nor should it craft pieces to influence their audience's opinion of the story by way of character assassination.

Finally, as a colored citizen of this country, I want to feel safe. There is a struggle within America's police force, and the solutions are not yet clear. But I would want to know what's being done about this. That means keeping a close eye on the police force and an equally close eye on those who write about the police force. 

It's a dangerously unstable relationship, where either the police or journalists could act irresponsibly. And it's other journalists who must maintain that balance of power.

Reporters Must Be Thick Skinned, Yet Compassionate In 'Hard News' World

Cameron Fields
cf710614@ohio.edu

Covering "hard news" -- news like murders, sexual assault, school shootings -- is "hard" for a reason.

These events are considered hard news because they're difficult to cover in that reporters not only must get the facts straight, but reporters can also experience resistance from the people affected by the events.

Further, as reporters cover events like these, they have to walk a fine line between doing their jobs, as well as giving people privacy in the wake of tragedy.

For example, during the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, some of the local reporters were met with resistance from the people affected by the shooting.

Some of the people in the town felt the reporters were invading their privacy, wanting to grieve in private over the loss of their children and loved ones.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/12/14/school-shooting-reported-in-newtown-conn/

These claims from people in Newtown were reasonable -- anyone who loses a loved one should be able to grieve privately and in peace.

But at some point, the reporters working on the shooting must report on the shooting, which often requires talking to people for comment. Now, to be clear, the people don't have an obligation to comment.

But people shouldn't view the media as adversaries, either. Rather, they should view the media as being people who can relay important information to the public

For example, in July 1994, Maureen Kanka's daughter was raped and murdered in Hamilton Township, New Jersey. Kanka wanted to use the reporters in an effort to get information out to the public. She wanted people to know that her daughter was missing, and she knew the media could help her relay that message to the public.

Reporters should be cognizant of their abilities to control information, too. The reporter still has that gatekeeper role in which they control what is considered news and what isn't.

If they cross that line into something that's not newsworthy, they risk being publicly called out for trying to produce sensational journalism.

Though reporters can be used as tools to get information to the public, reporters should realize that they must not be intrusive. The media already faces stereotypes that portray journalists as people who only care about the story, like robots who are incapable of showing compassion.

Journalists who care only about the story will find themselves unable to gain trust in their sources. Sources want to be able to trust journalists; they don't want to look at journalists as a puppet who is controlled by a story.

                                        https://www.youtube.com/watchv=xnI8XIC0RSw

On the other side of things, journalists who gain the trust of their sources are able to do their job to the fullest extent.

The reporter and source don't have an adversarial relationship, and at most they have a symbiotic relationship in which the reporter relays the information from the source to the public, and the source willingly gives information to the reporter.

Regardless though, journalists who work in hard news must have thick skin -- they do work with tough topics like murder and crime. But they also must be able to show empathy in order to do their job to the best of their ability.

What would happen #IfTheyGunnedYouDown ?

Raquel Devariel

Rd320614@ohio.edu

We’ve all heard about it, we’ve all thought it was wrong, but why does it keep happening?

The media is on this vicious cycle where those who are underprivileged lack of accurate representation. In recent years that the audience, our stakeholders, have brought to our attention the phenomenon of character assassination.

Character assassination, as defined by Farlex Dictionary, is the malicious denunciation or slandering of another person, especially as part of an effort to ruin the reputation of a public figure. When this term is used, we often find it in stories that cover the comparison of white and black subjects and their appearance through the different media outlets.

A recent case that sparked this debate was when former Stanford athlete, Brock Turner, was accused of raping an unconscious and intoxicatedwoman after a fraternity party. His picture was all over the news, but some say that the media coverage was biased and showed Turner’s white privilege. Another factor that contributed to this public controversy was that his picture was pulled from Stanford’s yearbook and that it took 16 months for different mediums to release his mugshot.

However, even though these outlets had failed to release an accurate image of Turner, the community was proactive and decided to make comparisons.  The photo used seemed to portray him as an innocent-college student that only made one bad decision on a casual night out, while other black and minority offenders in the past years had been portrayed as delinquent, inhumane attackers for the same reason.

Another case in recent years that started this debate was when Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager was shot in Ferguson, Mo. When the news broke, a picture of Brown unsmiling and supposedly doing gang signs was used, giving us another reason to believe that many journalistic approaches have been biased when reporting about certain racial groups.

Picture taken from Twitter user @CJLawrenceEsq,
creator of #IfTheyGunnedMeDown

Although it is terrorizing to hear about these cases, this has allowed the community of minorities to express how they feel through social media. The hashtag #IfTheyGunnedMeDown was created by Twitter user @CJLawrenceEsq to make a statement about this current problem.

“It was a brilliant media critique, and while Twitter and other platforms may have no magical power to stop shootings or catch warlords, one thing they are very good at is catching the attention of the media,” said James Poniwozik in his article, #IfTheyGunnedMeDown and What Hashtag ActivismDoes Right.

This effort made by the community to reach out to journalist has been extremely powerful. Is it true that we have let down those who want to be informed? Have we forgotten that we are advocates of justice and transparency?

The answer should be no. As journalist it is extremely crucial to remember and be aware of our personal biases and step down if we can't report objectively.

We cannot forget that we are the voices of our communities and that the information we are passing down is meant to encourage them to act in a positive way; Rather than sparking a controversial debate because we have failed to exercise the values our job requires.  

Media Treatment of Victims

Erin Franczak
ef441614@ohio.edu

A journalist's job is to stay as neutral as possible, and commit to finding the truth with as little harm as possible. But, what happens if journalists look for the story without any regard to the person involved? That's when things get complicated, and journalists lose credibility.

The readings for this week showcased examples of victims who were made to feel strong emotions after speaking or not speaking to reporters.

Lenny Skutnik was a man who risked his life to rescue an Air Florida Crash survivor. He then had to deal with something some would say is a whole lot worse... the media. He told News Lab, "I did one network and another one called, so I asked them to call the one I talked to." He said most of the reporters were just looking for a story and were rude, but there were some nice and professional reporters.

This personally makes me worry for the future of journalism. I want to be able to reach out and make a difference by finding the truth and solving problems the world faces by unveiling secrets through writing.

I was very frustrated with the fourth article. It focused on a sheriff who wanted to be sure that a shooter remained nameless. The officers felt that he did not deserve to be named and live on through his horrid legacy, but instead, some journalists uncovered his name and it was leaked to the press. Even if this wasn't mentioned in any journalistic code, why would you feel the need to release his name? What good would it really do?

The code that would best go with this example is "recognize that legal access to information differs from an ethical justification to publish or broadcast." But in the end, it is my opinion, and this is still a controversial issue.

The article does make a point to mention, "Advocates for naming perpetrators argue the public stands to gain more from transparency than it does from withholding information."

Another example of journalists in the wrong comes from treating some races better than others. the examples that this article showed were titles of published news stories. The first was "Trayvon Martin was suspended three times" and, another was "shooting victim had many run-ins with law."

http://didyouknowblog.com/post/103213671507/racism-is-bad-for-your-health-people-who-have

But when there was a white suspect the article read, "Bank robbery suspect was outstanding Blue Hills student." I think that racism is example of ignorance and bias. It clearly does not belong in the world, let alone articles meant to represent neutrality and unbiased reports. My friend once told me that when it comes to black citizens, the news reports their past, but white citizens will be reported on their potential future.

One perfect example of this is Brock Turner, who is still known as a swimmer, which was his future rather than what he did to a harmless girl.

Even with all this bad journalism, there are still well-trained professional reporters working to seek the truth. Maureen Kanka used journalism and reporters to plea for her daughters safe return and then to help set up Megan's Law. I hope that one day I can be one of the journalists who make a difference rather than just be looking for the next story.

The Problem with News Coverage

Sydney Dawes
sd983213@ohio.edu

Journalists love being the first to get to a story, or even the ones to break the story itself. They love to touch hearts and call others to actions through the stories they tell.

In many cases, though, the search for compelling stories and images quickly turns into a cruel intrusion. We also see that there is power in how a story is told: the way we portray the "characters" in each story truly influences local, national, and international attitudes.

The Difference in News Coverage

Social media exploded after the death of Michael Brown: with #IfTheyGunnedMeDown, Twitter users questioned why news organizations were choosing certain images of Brown, as well as certain headlines.

People began to compare the media representations of white criminals and black victims. Many of these comparisons demonstrated a sense of pity toward white youth who committed crimes, even if they were violent. These headlines hinted at rough childhoods, the absence of parents, and the struggles of not fitting in or even being bullied.

More recently, we have seen many examples of this approach to headline-writing and the selection of images to use in a story in the case of Brock Turner. Many news outlets used a photo of him smiling in a suit and tie. Headlines highlighted the fact he was a promising athlete and college student. The controversy behind this, as I'm sure most of you know, is that he was convicted of raping a young woman behind a dumpster. If the stories written about him were focused on the rape allegations, why weren't the traditional mugshots used?

An image commonly used in the news coverage of Brock Turner and his trial. Via NBC News.

This need to identify with the criminal was not represented when talking about a victim who also happened to be black, however. News organizations put out headlines that talked about the negative aspects of the victim's life: records of suspension, drug histories, and possible instances of past criminal behavior.

The misrepresentation of the people involved in the story goes against many codes of journalistic ethics. For instance, the Society of Professional Journalism. For instance, the code of ethics states the following: "Provide context. Take special care not to misrepresent or oversimplify in promoting, previewing or summarizing a story." By pointing to irrelevant information about a person, journalists can take away from what happened to that person or what that person did, and it almost seems as if they are trying to justify the wrong that occurred.

"Yes, he shot 5 people in his school, but he was a brilliant kid who was misunderstood by his mother. Oh, he also happened to be white."

"Yes, he was shot and killed by a policeman while he was unarmed, but he had a history of drug abuse and was suspended multiple times from his high school. By the way, he was also black."

A Larger Problem

We aren't letting black victims be victims: American journalism tends to tack on any bit of information they can to make the victim seem less worthy of sympathy or compassion.

On the other hand, white criminals are often painted as victims of cruel circumstances. Ethically speaking, this is not horrible. After all, it's important to keep in mind as a writer that people are people, even when they're acting monstrously. The SPJ Code of Ethics actually agrees: "Show compassion for those who may be affected by news coverage."

This is not reflected in instances where a criminal is black, though, which is incredibly problematic. Why are journalists deciding to show compassion to white criminals over black victims? Instances such as these also reflect the larger problem of the institutionalization of racism, even within American journalism.

As journalists, we have the power to shape public perception and national attitude. That is why it is crucial not to reinforce racist stereotypes in news coverage, but maintain some sort of compassion to the people affected.

The Library

Erin Franczak
ef441614@ohio.edu

*Spoiler Alert*

http://www.publictheater.org/Tickets/Calendar/PlayDetailsCollection/13-14-Season/The-Library/

Two nights ago, I ventured out in the cold to The Library, but not the Library with books, computers, and students studying. This was very different. It was a play based upon  school shootings in the U.S.

It was heartbreaking and very intense. I almost cried within the first five minutes. They began the play by projecting newspaper clippings of the most recent school shootings. There were so many. The story then delves into the library where the shooting occurs.

Mr. Kurtz told all the students in the library to hide in the AV closet, but there wasn't enough room. So, the main character,  Caitlin Gabrielle, her friend, Laura, and two other students hid nearby. The gunman came in and shot Laura, and Joy who was a student. He then asked someone where the other students were hiding. They were also shot and killed. One student assumed that Caitlin Gabrielle told the shooter where the others were hiding.

The scene then changes to the hospital, where her mother and father were discussing what the media thought happened based on what another student said. From a journalistic perspective, everything about the next few scenes were atrocious.

First off, the newspapers never made a wounded victim feel at all comfortable. They wanted the story and didn't care how they got it. The fact that the Gabriel's family felt unsafe going to the newspaper was unacceptable.

Another example of bad ethics that the media followed was the first article where they only talked and listened to the perspective of one student rather than both. They also constantly used bias and made the student, Joy, an angel who prayed up until her death while Caitlin was meant to look like a bad egg. There was even a book published that talked about how Caitlin needed forgiveness.

Another story was published that broke the  SPJ code of  minimizing harm. The code states realize "Balance the public's need for information against potential harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance or undue intrusiveness." By leaking the fact that Caitlin bought alcohol from the shooter will not help the case, or give the readers any insight into what happened. It will only hurt her, and make her feel worse.

This all happened before the police report came out.

There was also a scene where Caitlin was questioned by authorities, and the impact it had on her. This scene was vital to the play because it showed how a victim of a shooting was treated. The police officer was harsh and showed no sympathy for her loss of her best friend or the injuries she accumulated.

Another scene that was crucial to the production was when her parents went to talk to a lawyer about victim compensation and she received almost nothing unless she retracted her statement about claiming Joy was the one who told the shooter where the victims were.

Then the report came out, and it was Joy who told the shooter where the victims had been to save her life.  The shooter AND THE MEDIA ruined this girl's life.

Freedom Sings at Ohio University

Jacob Solether

js282314@ohio.edu 

Who 

Freedom Sings is a group of highly talented musicians that travel to universities around America, showcasing the powers of the First Amendment by performing groundbreaking, historical music. The program is part of the First Amendment Center. Ken Paulson, the president of the First Amendment Center, hosted and narrated the event. Ohio University students and faculty were in attendance.

What

The event consisted of live music, images and videos displayed on the projector screen and conversations among the audience and the performers on stage. The message was clear, it was all about the power and passion of the First Amendment and how artists use it to shed light on certain issues or to create social change. It was a short crash course through the history of American music and how artists have used the freedom of speech to enhance political and social awareness, as well as to show how music has molded America into what it is today. They talked about the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and the freedom of assembly and petition. Paulsen spoke about historical events that changed America forever, and in between each speech the band played a song which had to do with the story.  

When and Where 

Four members of the group performed in Baker Theater at OU on Thursday, Sept. 29, 2016.

Favorite Song 

The man on the keyboard, who is a former member of the Steve Miller Band, and who Ken Paulsen said was the "Hands of soul", performed Gil Scott Heron's song, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised." It is such a powerful song that speaks about some of the tragic events of the 1960's and it was great to see them pay tribute to it.