|
Sex, Drugs, and TV News:
When a Reporter is Arrested
A paper submitted to the Radio-Television Journalism division
of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Nancy McKenzie Dupont
Associate Professor, Department of Communications
Loyola University New Orleans
Box 201, 6363 St. Charles Avenue
New Orleans, Louisiana 70118
(504) 865-3293
[log in to unmask]
Mary Blue
Associate Professor, Department of Communications
Loyola University New Orleans
Box 201, 6363 St. Charles Avenue
New Orleans, Louisiana 70118
(504) 865-3433
[log in to unmask]
Running head: REPORTER ARRESTED
Abstract
On January 21, 2000, television newsrooms in New Orleans faced a major
journalistic and ethical crisis. The highest-paid and one of the most
respected television news reporters was arrested in a sex and drug scandal
that shocked his fellow reporters and the officers in the New Orleans
Police Department. Since Mike Longman had worked in four different
broadcast newsrooms in the city, many of the television news managers and
his fellow reporters knew him well. In addition, Longman was a true media
insider whose reputation as a hard-hitting journalist was well known to the
public. Television news managers had many decisions to make that
day: whether to cover the arrest, what significance to give it, and how to
frame the story in their newscasts. The news director at WVUE-TV, which
employed Longman, had even tougher responsibilities to inform his audience
about the problems of a showcased reporter. This study examines the
newscasts of all four television news departments that were produced on
that day and questions some of the news managers as to the goals and values
that informed the decisions made immediately after the Longman arrest. It
provides insight into television newsroom practices on a day in which an
insider became the news.
Introduction
In the summer of 1996, 39-year-old Mike Longman became the highest paid
general assignment news reporter in New Orleans television
history. Sources told the New Orleans Times-Picayune that Longman's
three-year contract with WVUE-TV Fox 8 called for $95,000 in salary the
first year and $100,000 in salary for the second and third years (Lorando,
April 3, 1996). Longman's former employer, CBS-powerhouse WWL-TV, had
refused to match the Fox 8 offer. Longman's WWL contract had a non-compete
clause which would keep him off of the air for six months, but when he
returned, he'd be Fox 8's showcased 9 pm reporter with more time to
research and tell his stories.
Longman cut his teeth as a television reporter at WWL. The station hired
him in 1983 after he spent three years at WGSO radio followed by two years
at WWL radio (WVUE-TV, 5:00 pm, January 20, 2000). At WWL-TV, Longman
became known for his investigative, hard-hitting reports. The
Times-Picayune called him " . . . a career pavement-pounder with a flair
for fact-finding and a refreshing no-frills delivery. The emotionally
detached precision of his reporting has long distinguished him—and WWL—in a
medium given to outbursts of sensationalism and hyperbole" (Lorando, April
9, 1996, D-1). The newspaper concluded that WWL's loss was WVUE's gain,
and Longman himself quipped that he was " . . .not going to be easy to
replace" (Lorando, April 9, 1996, D-1).
But in a stunning change of fortune, on Friday, January 21, 2000, Longman
would be under arrest for sex crimes with juveniles. The day before,
police had seized 22 videotapes and drug paraphernalia from Longman's
home. Police said the tapes showed about 50 males having sex and taking
drugs with each other and Longman, and several of the males appeared to be
younger than 17 years of age. A New Orleans Police source told WVUE-TV
news director Keith Esparros that the scenes on the tapes were among the
worst the police department had ever seen (Esparros, 2002). Longman was
in the middle of a career-ending scandal, and New Orleans television news
departments faced a day of decision that would test their commitment to
truth-telling and journalism ethics.
The News Day. Friday, January 21, 2000, was already a day of big news
stories, both locally and nationally. Jury selection was continuing in
Baton Rouge in the corruption trial of former Louisiana governor Edwin
Edwards. All of the New Orleans television news departments were following
the Edwards trial, though some did not report on the court proceedings
every day (Pendarvis, 2002). The Elian Gonzales case was unfolding in
Washington and Miami, with the arrival of his grandmothers from Cuba
providing the latest twist. The women had come to plead with the United
States to allow Elian to return to Cuba.
On Thursday, January 20, Longman hired well-known defense attorney Arthur
"Buddy" Lemann III. He told Esparros he was going to surrender to New
Orleans police the next day and that he might hold a news
conference. Shortly before his surrender at 1:25 pm, Longman made a
statement to the media in Lemann's office. He said he didn't know the
details of the charges against him so he couldn't be specific, but that he
"never knowingly harmed or hurt anyone" (WVUE-TV, 5:00 pm newscast, January
20, 2002). He told reporters and photographers from all four television
news departments that he expected them to do their jobs even though
covering his arrest would be hard. New Orleans Police Sex Crimes Unit
commander Lt. David Benelli also attended the news conference. Longman
surrendered and appeared before Judge Frank Marullo, who released him on
his own recognizance.
At approximately 3:00 pm, New Orleans Police Superintendent Richard
Pennington called the media together for a news conference of his own. He
outlined the charges against Longman: crime against nature, carnal
knowledge of a juvenile, contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile,
possession of drug paraphernalia and possession of cocaine
residue. Pennington said the investigation of Longman began after a
15-year-old resident of a home for abused youths told his social worker
about having sex with Longman. The social worker reported the incident to
police, as he or she was required by law to do. Pennington said the seized
videotapes showed sex among males some of whom appeared to be underage, and
he asked the public for help in identifying them. "We're talking about
parents; we're talking about young people who may have been in his
association" (WGNO-TV, 5:00 pm, January 20, 2000), Pennington said.
WVUE-TV carried the Pennington news conference live after breaking into
afternoon programming. The stations then began preparing their coverage
for the four early newscasts that would air at 5:00 pm.
Review of Literature
This study attempts to evaluate the television news coverage of the Mike
Longman arrest, given that he was a media "insider" with experience at two
of the four television news stations and given that his arrest involved
crimes with juvenile victims. Current scholarly literature provides
little guidance on studying television news practices when the story
involves a colleague. However, two broad areas, the studies of non-routine
news decisions and the ethical considerations of conflict of interest can
provide some assistance in the current inquiry. Professional ethical
guidelines for covering juveniles helps in evaluating the coverage of the
Longman arrest, which at the time appeared to involve numerous underage boys.
The Non-routine story. Tuchman (1978) described the elements of
non-routine news coverage as the initial shock inside of the newsroom and
the changes in work routine needed to cover the story under
deadline. Berkowitz (1992) took the "what-a-story" a step further by
identifying three phrases of non-routine coverage development: 1. Initial
pronouncements of surprise, 2. Giving the surprise story better play than
non-routine news, and 3. Stretching resources to get the story
covered. In his study of television news coverage of a plane crash,
Berkowitz concluded that the demands of covering a non-routine news story
can result in coverage that is less than desirable. The more time that
passed after the story broke, the more typical coverage of the event
became. One could expect, then, that the first coverage of the
"what-a-story" might be different than the coverage of more routine,
expected events.
Conflicts of interest. Though there are numerous ethical challenges in
the Longman story, the one most closely studied by researchers is the
conflict of interest issue. The Code of Ethics of the Radio-Television
News Directors Association requires electronic journalists to act with
"independence." However, the code addresses mostly influences from the
outside—management, advertisers, special interest groups—that may distort
the news (Radio-Television News Directors Association, 2000). It does
not mention the particular conflict of inside interests, as the Longman
arrest clearly presented in January 2002.
Matelski (1991) outlines four limitations to any ethical decision made in
the television newsroom: 1. There is a limited amount of time to report
the story on the air, 2. Television must tell its stories visually, so
there must be video available for most stories, 3. There is an inherent
emphasis on entertainment in television news, and 4. Television news
operations must make money for their stations in order to stay on the air.
At least the first three and possible the fourth limitation appeared to be
in operation in the coverage of Longman's arrest.
Christians, Rotzoll, and Fackler (1991) apply Aristotle's Golden Mean as a
way of resolving a conflict of interest problem in a newspaper
newsroom. The question was whether a newspaper reporter could cover a
story without bias if he were heavily involved in the work of a political
party. The Golden Mean allowed the newspaper to prohibit its reporters
outside activities in some cases but not others while prohibiting
absolutely a reporter from covering his or her own activities. The authors
stated that a human being cannot "remain above the fray, a neutral
observer. Since humans are valuing creatures, neutrality is not possible"
(Christians, Rotzoll, and Fackler, 1991, p. 41). They state that a news
organization's moral obligation is to make it clear "what values are
operating." Day (2000) makes a similar argument that not all conflicts of
interest are unacceptable or are damaging to the person faced with an
ethical decision, but that disclosure of all conflicts of interests to the
public should be a guiding rule for news organizations.
Klaidman and Beauchamp (1987) deal with several cases in which the news
media became part of the news story. In all those cases, the news
organization has to deal with the possibility of being manipulated by
inside or outside sources. The authors do not condemn news organizations
for being involved in a story; in fact, they say it is often
unavoidable. They conclude: "For manipulation to be unacceptable, there
must be not only a manipulative influence but an undue or unjustified
influence" (Klaidman and Beauchamp, 1987, 207). In general, they argue
that business considerations are not acceptable reasons for manipulation to
occur.
Juvenile victims. The service arm of RTNDA, the Radio-Television News
Directors Foundation, has studied extensively the problems presented when
juveniles are crime perpetrators or victims. Writing for RTNDF, Steele
and Tompkins argue for a moral mean saying that identifying juveniles can
cause unjustified harm while avoiding crime stories with juveniles can
ignore public issues. In general, they conclude that juveniles deserve
special privacy protection, and they suggest news decision makers ask a
series of questions about the severity of the crime, the importance of the
story, and the juvenile's role in the story. Since, in this case, the
juvenile discussed having "consensual sex" with Longman, his role is the
story may have had an impact on the decision about whether to release his
name.
Ultimately the decision on a juvenile's role in news stories may fall,
once again, within a moral mean. Steele and Tompkins advise reporters in
all cases to recognize the harm they may cause but to balance that against
the goal of truth-telling.
Methodology
There are four television news organizations in the New Orleans
market: WWL-TV (CBS affiliate), WDSU-TV (NBC affiliate), WVUE-TV (ABC
affiliate), and WVUE-TV (Fox affiliate). At the time of the Longman
arrest, all were presenting 30-minute newscasts at 5:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and
10:00 pm. In addition, WVUE-TV had a 30-minute newscast at 9:00 pm. On
the day of the arrest, all of the newscasts except WVUE-TV's 9 pm report
were recorded for later analysis. The coverage was then viewed in its
entirety for analysis, contrasts, and comparisons.
In November of 2002, interviews were conducted with the news directors at
WVUE-TV and WGNO-TV and with the executive producer of WDSU-TV. Since the
writers were unsuccessful in reaching the news director at WWL-TV, her
reactions to the coverage were taken from her quotes that appeared in the
local newspaper, the Times-Picayune. Details about Longman's history,
employment contract, and arrest were also taken from the Times-Picayune in
addition to the newscasts.
The research attempted to answer these questions:
1. What rationales were in play in the newsroom decisions on the day of the
arrest?
2. What did the news directors or other news managers know and when?
3. Did any structural variables, particularly the looming February ratings
period, come into play in making the decisions?
4. How was the coverage similar and different on the newscasts of the four
television stations?
5. Did codes of ethics inform any of the decisions? If so, which values
seemed important?
6. Did the fact that Mike Longman was a media insider make a difference in
each station's approach to the story? If so, how?
7. In the case of WVUE-TV and WWL-TV, how much did they "own" their
employee, i.e., did they identify him as having been associated with them?
8. What external sources (lawyers, corporate officers, public relations
firms) were consulted in preparing the coverage of the Longman arrest?
Findings
Rationales in play. All of the news managers spoke of objectivity,
fairness, balance, and accuracy as values that came into play in making the
news decisions about the Longman arrest. All also spoke of the extreme
sensitivity of covering the arrest of a man they knew well. Esparros held
a news department meeting, and told his staff ". . .this would be one of
their toughest days as journalists: to cover a story that they were
involved with. They had to show Mike no favoritism because they liked him,
and to show him no more acrimony because they didn't. And that we would be
tested for our ability to be fair and balanced more on this story than on
any other story that they may have the opportunity to do. Opportunity is
an interesting word. It's one of those management words. And I think if
there was a goal it was, that when this was done, that people would look at
us and say, 'They behaved as journalists'" (Esparros, 2002). Pendarvis
said, "It was a day that made me sick to my stomach because I had to keep
all these emotions in check in the newsroom and make sure that the story
was covered the way we would cover any other story in its fairness,
accuracy, and balance, those three things. We needed to make sure that we
weren't going out of our way to protect Mike. He's a person I've known a
very long time, and I've actually got positive feelings toward
Mike. Because I've had lunch with this person and traveled with this
person, I need to make sure I'm not going out of my way to make sure that
this story was more fair, balanced, and accurate than it would be if it
were somebody else" (Pendarvis, 2002). Hernandez said, "I'll tell you
something. It was painful for those of us who know him, but again this is
the point, you put your personal feelings aside and you just look at the
facts. It was very difficult. Personally, I was challenged. Mike is a
friend of mine, I know him, but I know I have to do the story" (Hernandez,
2002). Clearly, all realized the story was unusual in that it involved a
fellow broadcast journalist.
Who knew what when. Though the news managers admitted that they knew
Longman drank alcohol and lived a gay lifestyle, the news of his alleged
criminal behavior was a surprise. Hernandez had not heard any rumors, and
learned of the arrest on the day it happened (Hernandez, 2002). Pendarvis
was told by someone on her staff that a reporter was going to be arrested
in a sex scandal. She tried to confirm the report and get more
information, but she failed. She found out the identity of the reporter
and the charges against him on the day it happened (Pendarvis,
2002). Esparros began dealing with the story two days before it broke when
sex crimes investigator Benelli called him and said he had an urgent
message for Longman. Longman told Esparros that he might be arrested
because he "went home with a guy" who turned out to be underaged. On
Thursday, Longman told Esparros he had an attorney and that he might hold a
news conference before he turned himself in. Esparros tried to talk
Longman out of holding the news conference. The next morning, on his way
to work, Esparros learned that Longman would be arrested on charges
stemming from sex with juveniles. He called NOPD police spokesman Marlin
DeFillo and recalled the following conversation: ""Let's go off the
record. What are we talking about?' He said, 'It's bad.' I said, 'How
bad. I understand it's one person.' He said, 'No. It's a number of
people.' Repeated offenses with different people? Yes? All underage? We
think so. And he said we also have confiscated videotapes. Videotapes of
what? Videotapes of him having sex. How bad are the tapes? He said some
of the worst stuff he's ever seen in his career. At that point I knew I
was in for an awful day" (Esparros, 2002).
Structural variables in play. Esparros and Hernandez said there were no
network affiliation or market size factors that influenced the way the
story was covered on their stations. Pendarvis, however, had a competitive
concern. "We were just heading into a ratings period. You think, this
story is big news, people want to see it, but how do we identify this
guy? Do we say the name of his TV station, and does that drive people to
the other station" (Pendarvis, 2002). Esparros said the eminent ratings
period played no role. "I'll cop a lot of guilt for doing stories that are
somewhat geared to a Fox audience. I would be an absolute hypocrite if I
told you I never do that. In this case, I wasn't worried, truly, and this
is the only day you'll ever hear me say this, I wasn't worried about
ratings. I was worried about living up to an image. I was really worried
about getting through a difficult day without making a gaffe. I didn't
want to see in the paper two days later that Fox 8 was overly compassionate
or cut him some slack because I thought the newsroom's credibility was
absolutely on the line and that a wrong move here could ruin us for
years. And this is a station that had made lots of bad moves in the past,
and we're still recovering from some of them" (Esparros, 2002).
Similarities and differences. All four television news stations began
their newscasts with the Mike Longman arrest at 5:00 pm and 6:00 pm. At
10:00 pm, three of the four began their newscasts with Longman; his
employer, WVUE-TV, chose the Edwards jury selection as their 10:00 pm lead
with Longman following as the second story. Esparros (2002) said the
reason for leading with Edwards at ten probably had to do with a newsroom
strategy of leading with a different story at 9:00 pm and 10:00 pm. On the
decision to begin with Longman at 5:00 pm and 6:00 pm, Esparros said, "I'm
sure there was an appearance thing. We didn't want to be seen as someone
who was going to back away from the story. It was also one of the (more)
lurid tales that you'd see on any one day" (Esparros, 2002). Pendarvis and
Hernandez concurred with Esparros's judgment, although both said if the
Edwards trial had been in a phase other than jury selection the choice
might have been more difficult.
In making the decision on what elements of the story to use and emphasize,
the news managers had the following possibilities:
1. The NOPD news conference
2. The Mike Longman news conference
3. Longman's house (i.e., the alleged crime scene)
4. Longman's court appearance
5. Longman walking in several locations
6. Longman's career record
7. WVUE-TV statement
In addition, they approached the story from four possible news values:
1. Public interest
2. Sex and drugs
3. Longman's celebrity
4. The particulars of the crime
All of the newscasts studied used all four news values in their
coverage. All of the stations used portions of the NOPD news conference
and portions of the Longman's news conference. All but one station,
WWL-TV, used video of Longman's house. One station, WGNO-TV, gave the
actual address of the house by a reporter referring to "Longman's First
Street home," and a few seconds later showing the street address. WVUE-TV
showed the street address but did not mention the street, and WDSU-TV
showed pictures of the house with no address. All of the stations had
information from the Longman court appearance, but only WWL-TV and WDSU-TV
discussed it in detail. All used video of Longman walking to various
locations. Longman's career record was shown in detail on WVUE-TV, but the
others referred to his long journalistic career in their descriptions of
him. WVUE-TV ran a statement by Esparros, read on camera, in its entirety,
while the other three used only quotations from the statement. WWL-TV ran
a quotation from Esparros on only one newscast. All of the stations
presented their coverage in live reports; three reports were live from
police headquarters while one station, WGNO-TV, reported live from the news
room.
Only two stations, WWL-TV and WDSU-TV, dealt with the issue of releasing
the name of Longman's first accuser, the 15-year-old group home
resident. Longman's attorney asked Judge Frank Marullo to order the
release of the name and address of the accuser. Marullo ordered the
release, citing the Constitution of the United States and saying an accused
has a right to know who was charging him. Orleans Parish District Attorney
Harry Connick objected, citing the Louisiana state confidentiality of
juvenile crime victims laws. WWL-TV and WDSU-TV discussed the dispute in
anchor tags; WDSU-TV showed a graphic quoting the state laws and promised
they would abide by them. It is not clear whether the name of the accuser
was released that day; in any case, none of the television stations
reported it.
While all four stations used combinations of "justifications" for doing
the story, their emphasis differed. Perennial ratings leader WWL-TV gave
heavy emphasis to sex and drugs, and they spent the least amount of time on
Longman's celebrity. At 5:00 pm, WWL-TV quoted high-ranking police
officials as saying they had known Longman for years, and they made
reference to Longman facing his colleagues in a news conference. The 5:00
pm lead began with the police department's appeal to get information about
the young-looking males in the tapes seized at Longman's home (the public
interest angle). At 6:00 and 10:00 pm, the Longman celebrity was played
down, while the sex and drugs angle increased. WDSU-TV led its 5:00 pm
with the police appeal/public interest angle, but at 6:00 and 10:00 pm the
justification for the story became a combination of Longman's celebrity and
sex and drugs. WVUE-TV spent much of its coverage on Longman's celebrity
status; that justification was followed closely by the sex and drugs
angle. WGNO-TV emphasized sex and drugs in all of its newscasts, followed
by a focus on details of the crime. While all of the stations had
elements of the crime story (proclamation of innocence, police and court
procedures, the non-lurid crime details), only WGNO-TV used it as their
second most-emphasized element. In general, all of the television stations
emphasized the sex and drugs angle more at 10:00 pm than they did in
earlier newscasts.
The importance of codes of ethics. The news managers praised
professional codes of ethics but admitted they did not consult them on the
day of the Longman arrest. Still, some of the tenets expressed in the
codes of ethics were cited as guiding principles in making news coverage
decisions is the Longman case. Hernandez said, "Every story we put on we
definitely want to be fair, we want to be balanced, and we go with the
facts. We're not going to blow it into something it's not, we're not going
to sensationalize it. I don't think we had any discussion on it but I know
that that is an unspoken rule around this place, and I think a lot of
people live up to it" (Hernandez, 2002). Pendarvis said, "This was a day
when it was pretty basic. Fairness, accuracy, balance. Do we have all
sides? Are we harming anyone who should not be harmed? There have been
other times when I will actually pull the newsroom ethics book that I got
from RTNDA and RTNDF, and I'll actually go look at it. Not that I follow
these people's guidelines verbatim, but to generate discussions in the
newsroom" (Pendarvis, 2002). Esparros said, "Some of the codes involve
not letting outside influences affect your reporting, and that's a very
tough one when you're in the middle of it. We even considered not covering
the story, letting another station cover the story and ask them if we could
air their report. We later figured that that would be an admission that we
were incapable of covering it right, so we went the other way. We said,
'We'll cover it and we'll take the heat if there's heat to be taken'"
(Esparros, 2002).
Longman as media insider. Esparros said he knew he knew he would cover
Longman's arrest because Longman would be disappearing from the air. But
as to how other media would handle it, Esparros had no predictions. "I
didn't know how the media would play that. If it were anybody on the
street, you might not even mention it, it might not make the news at
all. And I always hate when news reporters become celebrities" (Esparros,
2002). However, the other two news managers found Longman's celebrity
status a major factor in how they played the story. Hernandez said, "The
simple fact that this person is a person of notoriety does add a little bit
more weight to the story. Just for example, if a priest is arrested for
having sex with a minor, as opposed to an average Joe, the story with the
priest is going to have a little bit more of a factor of 'I can't believe
that the person would do something like that'" (Hernandez,
2002). Pendarvis bounced the story off of a fellow news director, who
helped her see that the story involved a person trusted in the
community. "It was to completely treat Mike Longman as we would have
treated the chairman of a bank or the CEO of a hospital, or the owner of a
real estate agency. I had to keep everybody focused on how we would cover
it if it were a teacher or a coach, a city councilman or the most prominent
doctor in a hospital or if it was the guy who built the Mardi Gras
floats" (Pendarvis, 2002).
WVUE-TV and WWL-TV and ownership of Longman. WVUE-TV ran a graphic
showing Longman's resume, including his tenure at WWL-TV and
WVUE-TV. WWL-TV's report made no mention of his employment at its
station. In a newspaper story that appeared the day after the arrest,
WWL-TV news director Sandy Breland defended her station's omission of
Longman's employment at her station. "Had a businessman been arrested for
the same crimes, we probably wouldn't have listed his past employers
either. It didn't seem relevant," Breland said (Lorando, Perlstein, and
Philbin, 2000, A-1). Another news manager found WWL-TV's position
surprising. Pendarvis said, "What struck me was that WWL-TV never, ever
claimed him. I found it odd" (Pendarvis, 2002). Esparros, who ran the
resume graphic, said, "I'd be lying if I told you I didn't want people to
know that he hadn't been here for his entire career. He was a longtime
journalist in New Orleans who had worked at at least four stations. Did
that make us look any better. I don't know. Maybe it did, maybe it
didn't" (Esparros, 2002). Hernandez saw the WVUE-TV resume graphic as an
attempt to prove he was an important journalist. She said, "Maybe they
were trying to show the audience that here is someone who was a very
upstanding person, very successful journalist and maybe they were using
that to back up that claim, that this guy is a very successful guy at what
he does" (Hernandez, 2002).
Who was consulted? Neither Pendarvis nor Hernandez remembered legal
issues with the Longman coverage, and neither consulted lawyers on the day
of the arrest. Pendarvis spoke about the coverage with her corporate news
director, but she said it was only because he was a trusted colleague whom
she used as a sounding board. Esparros, facing what must have been the
toughest story of his career, had no choice but to discuss the story with
his corporate bosses because they were in town for an annual budget
meeting. He said he would have called them had they not been in
town. Esparros said he showed WVUE-TV's on air statement to attorneys
before it was taped, and while he recalled the station hiring a public
relations firm, he didn't recall whether professional public relations
played a role in the coverage.
Conclusion
Three years after the fact, the news managers interviewed for this
research project seemed willing to talk about the important decisions made
on the day of Longman's arrest and could recall in great detail the
discomfort of covering a story about a media insider. All could recall
the ethical issues that presented themselves and values that were used to
address the problems. Two of the news managers reviewed their newscast
rundowns from the day before being interviewed. Since they remembered so
many details so vividly, it might be assumed that the few things they don't
remember may not be of great importance.
The Mike Longman story was clearly an example of non-routine news. Yet
there were very few expressions of surprise expressed during the
coverage. While expressions of surprise might have made the story more
justified to the audience, the lack of those expressions may have reflected
a desire to play this sensitive story as straight and "fact-driven" as
possible. As with all non-routine stories, the coverage was given better
play in the news of the day as evidenced by it being the lead story in
eleven of the twelve newscasts studied. Also, there was clearly an
indication that the news departments stretched their resources to assure
the best coverage possible by assigning several different reporters and
anchors to the story and by changing their emphasis from
newscast-to-newscast.
From an ethical standpoint, the news stations appeared to try to stand on
defensible moral ground. All of the news managers interviewed realized
they had become part of the story; all admitted this story was different
because they knew and had worked with Longman. And they all gave at least
lip service to the accepted tenets of journalism ethics: accuracy,
balance, fairness, and objectivity. They became part of a big story, but
none used business and financial reasons for any of the decisions they
made. Only Pendarvis admitted to being worried about the upcoming ratings
period and how the story might affect it, but in the end, she decided to
treat Longman as she would any other prominent member of the community.
Two of Matelski's limitations to television journalism ethical
decision-making plagued the New Orleans newsrooms that day. Television
news must use visuals to tell its stories, and that may explain why three
of the four television stations used pictures of Longman's house even
though the angry parents of juvenile victims could have found it and harmed
Longman. When asked about that possibility, the news managers said they
hadn't thought of it in those terms and that the house, to them, could be
viewed as a crime scene. And if television news must be entertaining on
some level, the heavily-emphasized sex and drugs aspect of this story could
be easily explained. The arrest took place in the crucial days before the
beginning of the February ratings period when attracting viewers is a
paramount concern.
The issue of protecting the identities of juveniles was a minor one in
this story. Only two stations mentioned the controversy of the name
release, and none used the name. Had the juvenile's identity been known to
the wider public, the ethical decisions required for this story could have
become more complicated.
Finally, there appeared to be in play a certain amount of fear among the
news managers that the sensitive story would not be handled correctly and
that the news organization would be held in contempt by the public. This
"fear factor" was an operating justification for covering the story and for
handling it the way they did. It is possible that the "fear factor" may
be functioning in many newsroom decisions, and it bears further observation
and study.
The researchers believe they have contributed to the literature about the
coverage of media insider scandals; to date, there is none other that deals
with that specific newsroom challenge. For future study, researchers
should attempt to interview news managers soon after the event to obtain
their perspective and then repeat the interviews months or years in the
future to determine how the perspectives change with time. An important
product of additional research could be a list of guidelines for newsrooms
to help them in making decisions about covering cases like the Longman
arrest.
Works Cited
Berkowitz, D. Non-routine news and newswork: Exploring the
what-a-story. Journal of Communication 42 (1), 82-94.
Christians, C., Rotzoll, K., and Fackler, M. (1991). Media ethics: cases
and moral reasoning. New York and London: Longman.
Code of ethics and professional conduct. (2000). Washington,
D.C.: Radio-Television News Directors Association.
Day, L. (2000). Ethics in media communications: cases and controversies.
Klaidman, S. and Beauchamp, T. (1987). The virtuous journalist. New York
and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lorando, M. (April 3, 2000) Longman scooped away from WWL. The
Times-Picayune (New Orleans), A-10.
Lorando, M., Perlstein, M. and Philbin, W. Reporter booked in sex with
boy. The Times-Picayune, A-1. (January 22, 2000).
Lorando, M. (January 22, 2000) Stations don't shrink from Longman
story. The Times-Picayune (New Orleans) F-1.
Lorando, M. (April 9, 1996) WWL's loss is WVUE's gain. The Times-Picayune
(New Orleans, D-1.
Matelski, M. (1991). TV news ethics. New York: Focal Press.
Steele, B. and Tompkins, A. (2001). Newsroom ethics: decision-making for
quality coverage. Washington, D.C: Radio-Television News Directors
Foundation.
Newscasts Cited/Examined
WDSU-TV, New Orleans. 5:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and 10:00 pm newscasts..
WGNO-TV, New Orleans. 5:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and 10:00 pm newscasts.
WVUE-TV, New Orleans. 5:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and 10:00 pm newscasts.
WWL-TV, New Orleans. 5:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and 10:00 pm newscasts.
Interviews
Esparros, K. (November 20, 2002). Tape and transcript in possession of
the authors.
Hernandez, B. (November 23, 2002). Tape and transcript in possession of
the authors.
Pendarvis, P. (November 19, 2002). Tape and transcript in possession of
the authors.
|
