Encounter with journalistic ethics

From time to time, I'm asked to share with my students or colleagues situations I've been in that required me to exercise good judgment with regard to the ethics of journalism.

Here's one such situation that came to mind yesterday when I looked back (okay, way, way back) on my early years working professionally in community journalism.

This happened to me in 1979 or 1980. Can’t remember the exact year but one of those, I believe.

I was general manager/editor of a twice-a-week 8K-circulation community newspaper in rural south-central Illinois.

I had heard about a physician in the local community who faithfully and rigorously jogged every day for exercise. He was pretty well known and respected, as I recall, and seemed to be in excellent health. He regularly ran marathons (26+ miles).

What really got my attention as a journalist/editor was when this same physician suddenly had a massive heart attack. In those days, as I recall, it was believed that someone who ran marathons was immune to having a heart attack.

So, again, my journalistic antenna went up when this well-known paragon of fitness physician had to transported by ambulance to St. Louis for life saving heart surgery.

He survived the surgery and returned a few weeks later to his practice in the town where we circulated our newspaper.

I called him and asked if he would consent to being interviewed about what he had been through, and explained to him that my story angle would be that he had proven the exception to the commonly held belief that you-can’t-have-a-heart-attack-if-you-run-a-marathon.

He agreed to talking with me for the record.

After I had written my story and a day or so before we went to press, he called me and asked politely if he could review the story before it was published.

Trying to contain my frustration, I politely explained that we had a firm policy at the paper again pre-publication review and that he had nothing to worry about. I assured him that I would be accurate and ethical and that the story would generally be an upbeat piece about how he had survived a heart attack.

But he still insisted on reviewing my story before it was published.

Again, I resisted, but again he pressed me for giving him the chance to look over what I had written.

“You know, Larry,” I agreed to talk to you when you contacted me. “Seems like you could extend this one courtesy to me,” he said. “If not, I won’t ever have anything to do with your newspaper again.”

I told him I’d consider his request.

You know what?

After a sleepless night, I ended up the next morning inviting him to come to my office to read the story before I submitted it for publication.

The guy came. I handed him the story. He retreated to my office, spent about 15 minutes in there with the story and exited with a smile and a handshake. He thanked me for doing a very good job.

I recall that he changed only one minor word of what I had written.

In retrospect, yes, I had violated our paper’s prohibition against pre-publication review.

But I had also gained.

I had cultivated and maintained a contact with an excellent source of information in our community--one that the newspaper would rely upon many times in the future, as it turned out.

Bottom line: In a small community, you as an editor or journalist should try never to burn a bridge or alienate a valuable source.

Even if it means you have to adjust your ethics.