Making a decision about ethics sometimes means doing your own thing while everyone else is doing something else — in public.
One news organization did this in reporting the arrest of a 49-year-old man charged with possession of child pornography in Calhoun County, Ala.
Multiple news organizations reported information provided by the Alabama Bureau of Investigation’s Cyber Crimes Unit. The suspect’s full name (and, occasionally, his mug shot) are published online by The Gadsden Times, Al.com, ABC 33/40,* Fox 6 news and others.
But not The Anniston Star, whose story includes this paragraph:
The Star typically withholds the identities of those charged with sex crimes unless they are convicted or plead guilty, because the stigma associated with such charges can linger even if the charges are dropped or the suspect is exonerated.
You could argue that The Star’s ethics policy is meaningless because the name is readily available online, any arrest for any crime already brings a stigma, and that the paper would howl if the government had done what the paper did in announcing an arrest but not the defendant’s name. And the name would be more likely to be published were it a public figure, as the paper balances “stigma” against news values. But at least give the paper’s management credit for thinking about ethics.
Two proposed additions to the Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics helps The Star justify its decision. The “Minimize Harm” section now says journalists should:
1. Recognize that legal access to information differs from ethical justification to publish.
2. Consider the long-term implications of the extended reach and permanence of publication, especially online. Provide updated and more complete information as appropriate.
So far, The Star has met its first obligation and started on the second. To fully meet the second, The Star must track the case and report the outcome. (In fact, every news organization has that obligation.)
As a member of the committee working on the code’s revisions, these sorts of issues are why we’ve been hard at work.
* Tip to 33/40: Your headline, “Arrested for child pornography,” implies guilt. The others correctly wrote arrested on child pornography charges.” The difference is subtle, but not to a libel lawyer.