Issues I had with the story:
1. The timing: The initial allegations against this guy were in the summer of 2009, almost TWO years ago. Had the paper gotten this scoop even anytime during the 2009-2010 school year, it would have not only been relevant, but an essential read for the student body. There are direct quotes saying he hasn't had any problems since his position was up for review, which, in my opinion, makes this "new" news pretty old.
2. The focus: The Red & Black could have actually developed a pretty fantastic piece about the university's sexual harassment policy in general, while incorporating the lack of punishment for Tennent-Brown's extremely inappropriate behavior. Though they did make an attempt to take the whole thing in this direction in following issues of the paper that week, it was too late. The story was already built around an attack on Tennent-Brown's character, which, though the allegations were true, made the paper lose a bit of credibility in my eyes.
I think the editors should have utilized the important information they had about this particular professor's history at UGA as a little extra shock value in an already interesting story about UGA's sexual harassment policy - or lack thereof. It would have been much more tasteful and come across as less of a scoop the Red & Black obtained from some former student with a personal vendetta against Tennent-Brown. Ethically, journalists are required to provide information to the public - but there is also an ethical requirement for them to know how to convey it in the most informative, helpful and least-damaging way possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment