Colorado will be one of more than 20 taking part in ‘Super Tuesday’ this year – the closest thing the U.S. has to a national primary election. And if Denver-area newspaper management has its way, then NONE of their reporters will be taking part in what could be the most pivotal ‘Super Tuesdays’ in recent memory …
The Denver Post’s editor Greg Moore recently issued an internal memo to the Post staff requesting that they not participate in the state’s caucuses. He also outright banned political reporters from such activity. In addressing what he called a “difficult issue,” Moore said that he realizes “it is a right to participate in our democratic process. So, with certain exceptions, we will not prohibit folks from attending caucuses. However, I would prefer you didn’t.”
Rocky Mountain News editor John Temple did Moore one better – Temple outright banned all RMN journalists from attending the Colorado caucuses. “Because caucuses are party activities that involve expressing your political position in public,” Temple said to his employees, “you should not attend them, unless you’re covering them for the Rocky.”
The Post and the Rocky are absolutely justified in their positions regarding caucus-staff policy.
Reporters, editors and newspaper decision makers at all levels are subject to a different set of rules than your everyday Joe Schmoe. Rocky editor Temple said journalists “must abide by a more restrictive standard (than non-journalist employees), given the disinterested neutrality from which news organizations must work.”
Once again, this goes back to the ideal of ‘objectivity.’ It’s inherently impossible to attain. The public may have come to the point where they expect and assume each story and piece is tainted by reporter bias. Newsroom policies, such as the ones the Post and Rocky have adopted, may be as intrusive on the lives of journalists as they are futile to dispel the public’s skepticism.
All that said, one of the principles that this writer has always believed in is that the mere perception of bias is as damaging as actual bias.
A reporter’s credibility is often tied to who they work for, what stories they’ve covered, and their record for journalistic integrity. Reporters are privy to information that everyday people can’t get out of elected officials, business leaders and celebrities. That privilege, however, comes with several conditions. One such condition is that they, whether they like it or not, are representatives of the media outlet that signs their checks. Their names, faces, words or voices are associated with a greater organization.
Sure, maybe certain reporters – like the ‘Champ Kinds’ in the field – have less to do with politics, but they are still representatives of a news organization.
Policies barring journalists from taking part in caucuses or primaries will not cut down on reporter bias – but the industry should do what it can to curb actual bias (such as the outright support for one political candidate over another) where it can.
