Pulitzer Prize Winner Bill Marimow Talks Ethics
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and current editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer Bill Marimow spoke to a packed auditorium earlier this week as part of the annual Dr. N.N. Oweida Lecture in Journalism Ethics. Like the lecture’s namesake, Marimow addressed a number of relevant ethical issues he’s encountered in his 44 year journalism career.
Two important issues that brought intense ethical messages during the presentation include using the names of minors in news stories and the journalistic rules behind reporter and source relations. Marimow told specific stories that he had experienced during his career for each of those ethical issues, which really seemed to resonate with the audience.
One such story involved an incident in Batimore when Marimow was an editor at The Baltimore Sun. A drug sting resulted in 26 arrests, and police implicated a 10-year-old boy as a lookout for the operation. One of Marimow’s reporters interviewed the boy on the record and received written permission from the boy’s mother to use his name in the news story.
“The boy wasn’t a public official, but he was involved in a really high profile story,” Marimow said. “There was an even division among the editors about whether or not we should publish the name.”
Marimow ultimately decided not to publish 10-year-old boy’s name in the paper, despite having permission from his parents. News organizations generally have a policy of not publishing the names of minors except in special circumstances. In this case, the boy was never actually arrested, so Marimow didn’t feel comfortable revealing the name of the boy that he referred to as “Little Isaac.”
The issue of naming minors in news stories is a hotly debated topic in journalism. For instance, Joseph Kolb of the Editor & Publisher believes that the names of juveniles implicated in crimes should not be withheld. “If media sources stick to the facts of the story rather than the ramifications of using a juvenile’s name,they can find solace in the old-fashioned social value ofthe media — to inform the community, advocate for the victims, and possibly even preventfuture incidents,” Kolb wrote (Kolb, 2011).
Marimow made an ethical decision that more news journalists should make in regards to sensitivity when dealing with minors. I would have likely made the same decision as Marimow and ultimately concluded that publishing a 10-year-old boy’s name would be inappropriate and violate common newsroom ethics.
The other situation Marimow described is not as straightforward. While Marimow was a local political reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer, one of his sources in former Philadelphia mayor Frank Rizzo’s administration asked him to attend a baseball game for free. Journalists are never allowed to accept gifts or special treatment from sources based on ethical principles.
“I was stuck with an intractable dilemma,” Marimow said. “I knew if I went to the game, I’d be breaking an iron rule. But if I turned down the source, I’d be offending someone who had given me unduplicable perspective over the last four years.”
Marimow consulted with his editor and decided to attend the game as long as he paid for the source’s food and parking that added up to an amount more than the price of the ticket.
In this case, I disagree with Marimow’s decision. Even if he eliminated the financial burden of the game, reporters still aren’t allowed to become friends with sources because it created a conflict of interest. If Marimow became friendly with this political source, he is less likely to write negatively about the administration for fear of alienating that friendship. It is for that reason that I would politely refuse any invitation, based on common ethical standards for journalism.
Most journalism ethical policies would have prohibited accepting the tickets. According to the NPR ethics handbook, “We don’t allow sources or subjects of coverage to pick up the check for dinner or pay our travel expenses, we respectfully turn down gifts or other benefits from those we cover, and we don’t sell materials sent to us for review (NPR Ethics Handbook, 2013).
Ultimately, I thought the Oweida Lecture and Bill Marimow’s presentation was a valuable experience. “If something makes you stop and pause, consult an editor,” Marimow said multiple times.
That was the point that resonated the most with me. If, as a reporter, you have any questions about an ethical issue, it’s important to ask for a second or third opinion to avoid making a rash or unethical decision.
These ethical issues are important to talk about because they are timeless. Ethics will never go away in the journalism profession. Lessons Marimow learned over 40 years ago are still relevant to today’s generation of journalists. It is for that reason that it is still incredibly important to study such stories.
References
Davis, Jack. Daily Press (12/15/1991). “ETHICS PREVENT JOURNALISTS ACCEPTING GIFTS”. Daily press (Newport News, Va. : Final ed.) (2163-7156), p. H.3.
Kolb, Joseph J (06/01/2011). “Coming of age: naming juvenile criminal suspects shouldn’t pose an ethical quandary”. Editor & publisher (0013-094X), 144 (6), p. 74.
Marimow, Bill (08/23/2010). “NEWSPAPER’S DIGITAL EVOLUTION EXAMINED IN ‘MIRACLE'”. Pittsburgh post-gazette (Pittsburgh, Pa. 1978) (1068-624X), p. C.2.
NPR Ethics Handbook. In Independence. Retrieved Februray 28, 2013, from http://ethics.npr.org/category/e-independence/#1-conflict-of-interest.