Last week a photo of an Iraqi man sobbing over his six dead children, his wife, two brothers, and his parents -- killed in an American air bombing -- dominated
The Oregonian's front page. It was the same day the newsroom reported the rescue of Pfc. Jessica Lynch and the death of an Oregon soldier.
Grieving Iraqi father 
The Oregonian front page
The newsroom fielded many complaints and cancellations.
Most of the complaints came in by phone that very morning. Here's a sample (unedited) of what the readers said via e-mail, provided by Oregonian ombudsman Dan Hortsch:
"Why did you run on front page April 2 LARGE picture of Iraqi family bombed? Instead of the rescued woman soldier as feature? Steven Dean's editorials Are shameful. I'm ashamed of Oregon's largest daily newspaper; NOT fair and un-balanced during this war."
"I wish to express my deep frustration with the very large picture above and below the fold on the front page of the paper today. I feel that the stories of a rescued soldier and an Oregonian killed while in service to his country deserve more space than a narrow left hand column next to this emotional charged picture. Let me say that I fully appreciate the grief and terror of the Iraqi people. In fact my class and I pray for them daily, but this picture was still not appropriate in light of recent events mentioned above."
"I found the picture on today's (4/2/03) Oregonian to be a great attempt to give sympathy and support to a merciless enemy. Certainly the story of civilian casualties needs to be told, but not as the main focal point of a daily newspaper. How about celebrating the return of one of our own? Or the tremendous effort we are taking in not harming civilians at the risk of our own? Or some indication of the 10s of thousands of innocents that have been killed by Iraq's own leadership?"
"The picture of the Iraqi mourning the death of his family is a perfect example of why I gave up my free subscription to your rag. ? It is war ... too bad but it is true ... there were NO pictures of the bodies lying around the World Trade Center on 9/11 ... there are never pictures of the women and children of Israel maimed by the homicide bombers from Palestine ... only the pictures of women and children from Palestine. Yellow journalism sucks. ... I, and many others now only watch FOX News ... don't always agree ... but at least we can make our own conclusions!!! PS ... saw the picture on a co-workers desk ... they are done with you also?"
"I am sickened by your front page today! How can you put that poor G.I. that died in a side column, yet make the Iraqi man who lost his family the main theme? Are you not American? You can bet I will be speaking with my husband this evening, and may be canceling our subscription. Perhaps you should reconsider your stance on producing newspapers -- it does NOT look as if you are objective, but ANTI- AMERICAN, ANTI-WAR, yet PRO-PROTESTORS!!"
A handful of readers called the paper to say thanks, Hortsch said, maybe four or five. By contrast, more than 50 people called, e-mailed, or wrote to express dismay with the photo.
|
E-MAIL NEWSLETTER |
Sign up to receive Ethics Journal by e-mail:
* Click here (sent Fridays at 9 a.m.)
| |
So how do we judge fairness and accuracy when it comes to the choice of photos or placement of stories? Do we do it day by day, week by week, or over a longer period of time?
That's the discussion that the newspaper's editors had the evening of April 1. Their decision was not unanimous. The Oregonian's Senior Editor/Visuals, Randy Cox, argued that the photo was a rare opportunity to tell the story of Iraqi suffering without visible bodies and blood.
"In hindsight, I maintain that we didn't err, though some readers found this image to be kind of 'In your face, America,'" Cox said. Other editors argued that the images of the Lynch family rejoicing would be more accurate.
Do you run the best image of the day? Or do you run the image that most reflects the news of the day? Or do you do something in between? At the Oregonian, editors have done a little of both.
Whatever approach your newsroom chooses, it's important to communicate that approach to the public. Hortsch and his assistant, Helen Shum, replied to every letter, e-mail, and phone call. He hasn't written about this particular case in his column., but that doesn't mean he won't in the future.
It's possible that this issue will come up again. As the U.S. gains military control of all of Iraq, journalists may gain greater freedom to roam the cities and countryside. Journalists with fewer restraints (from the Iraqi government or the American military) are likely to report more complicated and nuanced stories. Newsrooms back home will have to decide what to do with those stories and the accompanying images.
This week there was another image on the Oregonian's front page, this time of an Iraqi man pleading not to be shot like his companions who failed to stop when approaching a U.S. tank. Roughly a dozen people called, most of them complaining the newspaper's coverage of the war was "too negative, they wanted the positive side of the war," Hortsch said.
"In a sense, this issue captures one of the questions facing us each day: How do we capture both the harsh realities and the happy outcomes in a balanced fashion?" he asked.
There's no formula for answering the question, only the assurance that we will have to keep asking it as we cover the rest of the war and whatever comes next.
[ How do you decide? ]
I am not surprised by the complaints The Oregonian received...
