What we left out of our story and why

[EStreetJoe]

http://urbandale.patch.com/articles/what-we-left-out-of-our-report-about-a-baby-who-died-and-why

We didn’t put everything we had into a story about an infant who died at a day-care center. We want to tell you what we had and why we kept it to ourselves.

I'll let you read the full story off the website, but it's an interesting approach the editors took. I'm on the fence as to whether or not I agree.

 

[BDC99]

I agree with the call not to publish it. It adds nothing. And this sums it up for me:

The downsides were just as obvious: The woman on the tape and the baby’s family, we knew, were obviously and understandably devastated by the tragedy, and posting the recording could only add to their misery.

 

[FileNotFound]

I certainly think this sort of transparency and offering insight into the decision-making process is a good thing.

 

[Ace]

I don't see any reason to write this back-patting story.

 

[HejiraHenry]

I don't see any reason to write this back-patting story.

Because of what FnF said. I thought the note was well-handled.

 

[HanSenSE]

I don't see any reason to write this back-patting story.

Because of what FnF said. I thought the note was well-handled.

Seconded. Except for the titilation factor, I've never seen any purpose in running stories on the 911 calls. They make nice sound bites for our TV pals, but (and call me jaded if you wish), they all seem to sound the same after a while.

 

[BillyT]

I like it, because it compliments the 911 dispatcher.

But I am unsure the reader notices or cares.

 

[PCLoadLetter]

I don't see any reason to write this back-patting story.

Agreed.

I work in TV. I don't like 911 calls in general, and I make decisions like this all the time. When I decide not to air the 911 call, I don't replace it with a story telling the viewers how special I am for not running the 911 call.

 

[DanOregon]

911 calls are used, like other public records, because often they are the only thing news organizations can get their hands on if nobody is talking. Whether they add anything to the story or not is secondary in a lot of cases. But it shows that the paper is pursuing the story.

 

[beanpole]

911 calls are used, like other public records, because often they are the only thing news organizations can get their hands on if nobody is talking. Whether they add anything to the story or not is secondary in a lot of cases. But it shows that the paper is pursuing the story.

This. It's lazy, cheap reporting.

As a journalist, you've gotta listen to the 911 call because you're gathering information. But I don't see the value to publishing details unless the person making the call says something incriminating (of him/herself or someone else), or if the dispatcher totally botches the call -- for instance, there was a dispatcher in Maryland a few months ago that fell asleep during a 911 call. That's news.

Publishing someone's most horrific day just for ratings or page views is pretty sick.

 

[Stitch]

I'm glad an editor works so hard clapping the site on the back. Did he take a few days off to go to physical therapy to deal with the resulting muscle pull?

 

[Ace]

I'm glad an editor works so hard clapping the site on the back. Did he take a few days off to go to physical therapy to deal with the resulting muscle pull?

I would respond to this, but I am busy writing a story about why we didn't run a photo of a city councilman who looked like he might be grimacing and instead chose one of him smiling.

 

[tapintoamerica]

I agree with the decision to hold the 911 tape, but if you're going to write this explanatory story, you should tell us why this 911 tape differs from those you have aired.