Confusing coverage in breaking news may be SOP, but pre-empting tweets is new

California manhunt subject Christopher Dorner may or may not be dead: Forensics investigators will look at the teeth and make chest X-rays of the charred corpse found in a rental cabin where police say the former Los Angeles police officer holed up and exchanged gunfire with cops.

That image perfectly encapsulates the gnarly reporting around last night’s shootout. The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Office asked reporters to stop tweeting in the event Dorner was monitoring Twitter (police made the same request of TV viewers). Candy Martin, who was surprised to see her rental cabin on television — told police it had “no cable, telephone or Internet service,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

KPCC didn’t comply with the request and posted some bewildered reaction from media outlets and consumers alike. “It’s not unusual, particularly in a police standoff, for police to ask television in particular to be very careful in their live coverage,” Poynter’s Al Tompkins told me in a phone call. “But this idea of Twitter coverage is a new wrinkle.”

Tompkins mentioned an incident in Pittsburgh last year where a hostage-taker interacted with friends on Facebook during a standoff. “It’s an invevitable problem that police must be very concerned about,” Tompkins said. “It’s not unreasonable for police to ask for moderation, but they ought to explain their request. And if media decide to moderate their coverage, they have a responsibility to explain why.”

CBS News correspondent Carter Evans wandered into the area of engagement and dropped to the ground, holding the phone line open so viewers could hear gunfire, Merrill Knox reported for TVSpy. Even in that confusion, though, what was happening with the cabin was more or less clear; what followed was the sort of rough-hewn reporting that is now standard in breaking news situations.

Several news orgs reported Dorner’s body was found, reports police later knocked back:


NBC News also said a body had been pulled out of the cabin, Adam Martin reports, adding that a prankster got on the air on CBS Los Angeles.

CNN had a particularly bumpy ride: A breaking news alert at 10:17 p.m. ET said “Law enforcement in California have pulled a body from a burning home and are conducting a forensic exam, multiple law enforcement sources tell former FBI assistant director and CNN contributor Tom Fuentes.” A subsequent alert, at 12:27 a.m., said “Los Angeles police and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Office moved Tuesday night to counter reports that a body believed to be that of renegade ex-cop Christopher Dorner had been recovered from a burning cabin near Big Bear Lake, California.” And Wolf Blitzer said Dorner had hostages in the cabin with him, possibly based on a misreading of a L.A. Times report, TVWeek writes.

Related: Sandy Hook coverage: Is ‘good enough’ good enough?

Correction: We misspelled San Bernardino and Dorner’s last name in this post. The headline has also been updated to more accurately reflect the Sheriff’s Office’s request.

We have made it easy to comment on posts, however we require civility and encourage full names to that end (first initial, last name is OK). Please read our guidelines here before commenting.

  • Donald_W_Meyers

    I think censorship would be a fair statement, given that the person who is asking has a gun on his/her hip. While it may be phrased as a question, some would infer that the cop sees it as an order, just when a cop “asks” someone to step out their car.

  • Robert Knilands

    That proposition has been a lie for some time. When attempts at actual journalism are constantly barraged with vague criticism, while blank pages are praised as ground-breaking, something is wrong.

  • facebook-749911534

    International footnote: CNN’s Andrew Stevens, news reader anchor in Hong Kong bureau, read the news report today on Dorner and called him “Steven Dorner” two times during the reading. Ten minutes later, he read the name correctly, as “Christopher Dorner.” Doesn’t CNN have editors in Hong Kong who read English?

  • Mark Obbie

    Bravo! Thanks for calling attention to an important, debatable police-media clash (without the baggage of calling it “censorship”).

  • NateBowman

    “Confusing coverage in breaking news may be SOP…”

    “what followed was the sort of rough-hewn reporting that is now standard in breaking news situations.”

    I feel that this passing mention of reporting that does not adhere to principles of journalism denotes tacit approval of the perversion of journalism for the sake of sensationalism and gives lie to the proposition that Poynter really cares about these issues.

  • Poynter

    Mark, You make an important point. I’ve updated the headline and added a note that it’s been changed. Julie Moos, Director of Poynter Online

  • Poynter

    Thanks for letting us know. It’s fixed and we’ve added that to the correction. –Julie Moos, Director of Poynter Online

  • bigyaz

    You also misspelled “San Bernardino.”

  • Mark Obbie

    Asking us not to publish is not at all the same as censoring us. Censorship means ordering us not to publish, with the ability to punish us for disobeying. Your headline doesn’t recognize that very key distinction, which goes to the heart of what happened — and didn’t happen — in this case.

  • Matthew Hensley

    I was watching the CNN’s coverage of the LAPD press conference where the department dismissed the report that a body had been found in the cabin. It was funny to watch because as the PIO spoke, CNN had at the bottom of the screen something like: “Body found in cabin.” It was taken down within 3 seconds or so of the spokesman saying the report was false, so the network was was reasonably quick to retract the false information.