Sept. 4, 2010
A journalist’s number one duty is to report a story with all the facts for the public to know.
But is there a point where the reporter tells too much and you wonder if that was necessary, or better yet ethical to tell? Should a reporter ask themselves is this too embarrassing?
Former University of Georgia Athletic Director Damon Evans was charged with a DUI in Atlanta in July 2010, which resulted in him resigning from the university. All reports stated the facts about what happened that night, but then did they cross the ethical line?
ESPN published an Associated Press article that first reported the necessary facts of the story, but then continued to say, “Details from the Georgia State Patrol’s incident report from the arrest added even more embarrassment.” After that statement the AP added “even more embarrassment” by adding details such as “Evans was found with a ‘red pair of lady’s panties between his legs.’”
Courtney Furhmann, a 28-year-old woman, was riding with him in the car. She also was arrested and was charged with disorderly conduct. Evans said Furhmann was “just a friend,” and Furhmann said she had been seeing Evans “only a week or so.”
An article by the Huffington Post had a headline that read “Damon Evans Tried To Bribe Police, Had Women’s Underwear On His Lap: Police Report.” Should that be the headline? Is the real story that Evans had red underwear in his lap, or is it that after being the first African-American Athletic Director for the University of Georgia, he lost his job within six years because of drunken driving.
In the story he is quoted saying to the officer ,”I am not trying to bribe you but I’m the athletic director of the University of Georgia. … I don’t want you to use who I am but I would just ask that you take me to a motel.” When police asked Evans about the underwear in his lap he said, “She took them off and I held them because I was just trying to get her home.”
Evans has a wife and two children at home who are now dealing with the scenario. He apologized to them during a news conference.
Evans also was the voice of UGA during football games telling students not to drink and drive.
Michael Adams, president of the University of Georgia, said “… this is not an example of the kind of leadership that I expect our senior administrators to set. I have high regard for Damon personally; I care deeply about him and his family.”
Evans resigned from his role at the university and is now replaced.
Analysis:
The ethical question should be raised, if the reporters stuck to the story that he got a DUI and didn’t continue to make multiple other stories based on the additional information with what went on with the woman, would he still have lost his job?
Reporters made the decision to disclose all of the facts, knowing that his family and friends would see them and possibly result in him losing his job and relationships.
One part of the code of ethics for a journalist is to minimize harm.
Are these quotes necessary in reporting? Do they add informative detail to the story or is it extra information that is harmful to his reputation?
For all the journalists covering this story it was an ethical decision to add information such as what color underwear he had between his legs. Not only to go so far as adding those details in the story, but to directly say that they are embarrassing details, and then to go further by repeating them directly in the article.
I see both sides on this case.
I believe that if reporters didn’t turn the story into the fact that he was with a woman other than his wife and had her underwear between his legs and mentioned his job to the police officers, he may still have his job.
On the other hand, former University of Alabama head coach Mike Price went through a similar situation in which he was fired for his actions, dealing with a woman, which officials saw as unbecoming to the University.
Based on the concrete DUI facts, it is still cynical of Evans to preach “If you drink and drive, you lose,” because he apparently did. But I would argue I wonder if the journalists only discussed that he got a DUI and he just apologized for drinking and driving, if he still would have his job today and would have walked away with a slap on the wrist from UGA.
I see the point of view where it was unnecessary for headlines to read “Damon Evans Tried To Bribe Police, Had Women’s Underwear On His Lap: Police Report.” That is not the main story in my eyes. Evans’ DUI is the focal point, and reporters may have gone overboard with writing that headline.
It’s a journalist’s duty to tell the truth including all the facts, which would include the woman, the panties, his bribing efforts and police reports. The main duty of a journalist under the code of ethics is to seek the truth and report it.
The “embarrassing” facts came from a police report, which is public record. It would not be logical for a journalist to hide this information from the public because he or she found it to be too embarrassing. They would not be telling the truthful story to its full magnitude without reporting those details.
This story does raise the question: should journalists decide what’s too embarrassing to report?
– By Jacquelyn Kersh