THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, July 30, 1995 TAG: 9507300044
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A2 EDITION: FINAL
COLUMN: EDITOR'S NOTEBOOK
SOURCE: COLE CAMPBELL, EDITOR
LENGTH: Medium: 87 lines
At midday Tuesday, 29 editors and publishers from across the country, plus a couple of journalism educators, sat somewhat baffled in a conference room on the banks of the Charles, the river that runs between Boston and Cambridge.
The editors worked for tiny papers, such as The Review Times in Fostoria, Ohio, and for giant papers, such as The Wall Street Journal and The Philadelphia Inquirer. Virginia was represented by Edward W. Jones of The Free Lance-Star in Fredericksburg, Will Corbin of the Daily Press in Newport News and me.
For a day and a half, we had contemplated the conclusions of a year-long study on journalistic values.
The good news: Journalists and the public expect newspapers to embody the same enduring values - editorial judgment, balance, accuracy, community leadership, public access and crediblity.
The bad news: The public doesn't believe journalists live up to these values.
``Newspapers and journalists should be concerned about this disconnect,'' the study stated, ``as should other institutions such as government, corporations and civic groups that face a public which feels separated from them.''
The study, called ``Timeless Values,'' was prepared by The Harwood Group, a public issues research firm, on behalf of the American Society of Newspaper Editors. The society commissioned the study to explore ethical issues that newspapers will face as they start new-media projects such as Pilot Online and InfoLine, The Virginian-Pilot's Internet and telephone-information services.
The researchers talked with more than two dozen editors, 16 ``leading thinkers,'' 17 business people who could be potential partners with newspapers in new-media ventures and four groups of citizens.
As the report stated, ``a strange thing happens in conversations about new media. The more people talk about it, the more they turn their attention to basic questions involving journalistic values and the roles of newspapers and journalists in society.
``Amid all the recent hoopla about cyberspace and new media, people yearn most for newspapers and journalists to maintain their place in society - helping ordinary Americans make sense of the changing world around them.''
Where do newspapers fall short?
The complaints heard by the researchers are familiar.
Newspapers focus too much on conflict and not enough on underlying tensions; rely too much on the usual suspects for information; report the news in fragmented, confusing ways; put a slant in stories; emphasize bad news over good; and overdo shrillness and sensationalism.
At times last week, some editors grumbled about a public that doesn't understand the work of journalists. Some groused about readers who label stories ``biased'' simply because they don't agree with the stories' well-founded conclusions.
But gradually, the editors agreed that some traditional definitions of journalistic values aren't working any more. Balance, for example, means much more to readers than presenting ``both sides of the story.'' It also can mean presenting the wholeness of a community - what works well alongside what needs reform, the weak alongside the strong, life at the center as well as at the margins.
As Tuesday's meeting neared its end, the editors were challenged by Richard C. Harwood, president of the research firm and principal author of the study. He asked us to think about whether we are truly achieving some fundamental objectives in our news coverage:
1. Do we really convey a deep understanding of our communities, through broad sources, deep context and diversity of viewpoints?
2. Do we really explain, with context, meaning and perspective, or do we merely describe, with facts and data?
3. Are we really thorough and coherent in conveying the tone of our communities - as it is, and not as people would like it to be? Are we recording nuances, discovering the essence of stories, capturing the language people use to talk to each other?
4. Are we really providing clarity about complex problems, so people can engage them?
5. Can newspapers truly be indispensable to readers while dealing with commercial pressures, such as maintaining business success amid rising newsprint prices? If we can, what does that demand of us?
These editors will meet twice more to help narrow the gap between public expectations and press performance. Meanwhile, at The Virginian-Pilot, we will use these questions to sharpen our work.
Cole C. Campbell
Editor by CNB