What other approaches could CNN have taken instead of unpublishing hormones story?

CNN’s decision to remove a story about how hormones affect women’s voting decisions raises questions about unpublishing -- at CNN and on news sites in general. During a live chat, Poynter's Kelly McBride talked about the incident and addressed these questions:

  • Should CNN have unpublished the hormone story, and why?
  • What are the ethical implications of unpublishing a story?
  • What are some questions journalists can ask themselves before deciding whether to unpublish?
  • What are some good alternatives to unpublishing?
  • Is it ever OK to unpublish a story, and can you ever really "unring the bell"?

You can replay the chat here:

  • Mallary Jean Tenore

    As managing editor of The Poynter Institute’s website, Poynter.org, I report on the media news industry, edit the site’s How To section, and moderate the site's live chats. I also help handle the site's social media efforts, and teach social media sessions on the side.


Related News

Email IconGroup 3Facebook IconLinkedIn IconsearchGroupTwitter IconGroup 2YouTube Icon