WNYC was strictly adhering to the rules they have laid out for those who work for them, so in that sense it’s hard to fault them. But the more interesting question is whether or not these rules are fair. In a world where contract work is increasingly being used on many business fronts, news organizations included, an important question is raised: should a news outlet expect the same devotion to an ethics policy without any job security, benefits, or even promise of future work?
Todd Gitlin, a professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and the author of numerous works concerning the media, finds this policy to be “appalling.” “I’m open on the questions of what a full time boss is entitled to ask of the employee,” says Gitlin. “But the question of a freelancer, to me, is a no-brainer.” Gitlin mentioned the trend of news organizations relying on independent contractors, rather than committing to staff with all the benefits of full employment, and said what bothers him is that these part-timers “undertake a commitment which is not reciprocated.”
Richard Wald, former senior vice president at ABC News and also a professor of ethics, amongst other classes, at Columbia’s journalism school, holds a different view. [Full disclosure: Wald is a former professor of mine.] He says as long as the ethics are clear from the outset, than news organizations have every right to fire someone who violates those standards, no matter what the terms are of their employment. “The [news organization] is entitled to have their sense of what’s ethical, and you as the journalist are entitled to either accept or reject it,” says Wald. “If those rules are clear, even if the person is only part time, then they have every right to fire her.”
More than other news outlets, public radio needs to maintain an image of neutrality to retain some of its funding, which explains its reactive nature. Schardt says it’s important to keep in mind that these decisions are being made during a time of “enormous sensitivity” and that decisions to fire someone “are well considered and not taken lightly.” But she says that these sensitive times are causing her and others to question how these ethical guidelines can be updated. “None of us want to be caught in a position of having to be reactive to a James O’Keefe video,” says Schardt. “But the question is how to move out of this reactive mode.”
Would you really say that Mr Wald holds a different view? You only quote him that an organization can set rules and apply them, something Mr Gitlin may well agree with. But, as you already said in a previous paragraph, the more interesting question is whether these rules are fair. I sell you one story and you can control my life? If I am providing purportedly unbiased reporting about an event, I shouldn't jump into the story, but otherwise I should be allowed to have political views and act on them.
#1 Posted by Anonymous, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 01:45 PM
Interesting piece, I like what Rosen and Gitlin have to say. I'm also fascinated by the the Schardt statement about people "choosing" to be independent producers. That's evading reality. In this market, many folks are going independent because there are no staff jobs. A more interesting ethics issue than participating in demonstrations, I think, is whether news organizations have a right to exclude or fire freelance contributors based on work those people have done for other organizations which the news organization, rightly or wrongly, sees as compromising their editorial independence. That's a situation a lot more freelancers are in.
#2 Posted by Harris Meyer, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 02:17 PM
A few years ago, NPR cancelled an interview with me on the housing market (they called me) when they found out I was being threatened by a SLAPP suit (against my web site, ML-Implode.com).
Recently, they covered the SLAPP issue, sympathetically, apparently blissfully unaware that they are part of the problem (in a way, one of the most vexingly destructive contributors to the problem I have ever seen).
Their ethics are all messed up.
#3 Posted by Aaron Krowne, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 04:10 PM
Here's an excellent piece about how NPR's anchors are treated, compared with the lowly freelancers.
http://crosscut.com/2011/11/15/broadcasting/21549/In-public-radio-ethics%2C-it-s-who-you-are-that-counts/
#4 Posted by Harris Meyer, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 04:14 PM