| Press Responsibility
| [Home
Page] [Alternate Navigation] |
|
|
PRESS RESPONSIBILITY CONTENTS: Overview Vol. I - Ethics Vol. II - Plagiarism Vol. III - D. Motko Omissions/Deletions More Analysis Closing Post Script OVERVIEW Purposes: During 2000-2001, the Bradford Alliance for
Democracy (BCAD) produced three thoroughly researched studies about the unethical editorial practices of The Daily Review, Towanda, PA.
The primary purpose of these three reports is to improve the editorial ethics at The Daily Review. Secondarily, these reports provide the formats, criteria, and explanatory text that citizens in other communities can use to evaluate the ethical practices of their newspapers and to publish their findings for the benefit of their fellow citizens. |
|
Background: “How often do you find a group of citizens so unhappy with their news coverage,” wrote Lori Robertson in the American Journalism Review, Oct. 2000, “that they’re willing to spend their own time and money to prepare and distribute a 142 page report detailing what they think the newspaper is doing wrong? Welcome to Towanda, Pennsylvania. ... The committee [of citizens] provided numerous examples of citizens’ letters to the editor that included negative comments about the paper. When these letters appeared in The Daily Review, the criticisms had been cut out. In other letters, a comparison between the original and the published version shows that editing has altered the meaning or intention.” Since Ian Fennell became the Editor of The Daily Review, the accuracy of reporting and the adherence to accepted standards of editorial ethics by the Towanda Daily Review began deteriorating. A great many people had written, e-mailed, or phoned Publisher James Towner and Editor Ian Fennell about these issues during 1998 and 1999. Citizens met with Publisher Jim Towner and Editor Ian Fennell during 1999 and early 2000, to request changes to their editorial practices which were perceived as harmful. For example, Jane Moeller, Director of the Abuse and Rape Crisis Center (ARCC), met with them asking them to stop printing the names of domestic violence victims, thus putting these victims potentially at further risk of harm at the hands of their attackers. However, the victims’ names continued to appear in the paper. In December of 1999, Jane Moeller wrote to a number of experts on ethics in journalism concerning The Daily Review’s practice of naming victims of domestic violence in the paper’s news stories. In response, Louis W. Hodges, Ph.D., Knight Professor of Ethics in Journalism, Washington and Lee University, wrote, “It is morally unthinkable to add further harm to those who are weak and already down because of harm (physical and psychological) from domestic abuse.” (12/20/99, Lexington, Virginia). Tom Cooper wrote, “First as publisher of Media Ethics, I am happy to be quoted as saying that I don't think it is ethical to publish the names of victims ?? and especially not their addresses, photos, or any other contact info which could lead someone to find them.”(email 12/20/99). Dr. Deni Elliot (12/19/00)) wrote, ‘“I agree that victims of domestic violence should be treated with far greater sensitivity by the press.” Dr. Elliot is the Director of the Practical Ethics Center, University of Montana. She continued, “I was doing some mediation work between a woman who had been named and the newspaper that named her. I have never forgotten the moment when, in frustration, she said to the editor, "I wish the son of a bitch had raped me. At least then you wouldn't have reported my name." That event, about 10 years ago, has changed the way that I have thought and written about the ethics of reporting on rape and on domestic violence.”’ In our opinion the complaints of citizens fell on deaf ears at The Daily Review. As a result, BCAD formed a group called the Citizens for Press Responsibility @ The Daily Review (CPR@DR) in early 2000. Volume I: In July 2000, CPR@DR published a 142 paged report entitled The Ethics of The Daily Review: An Evaluation of its Editorial Practices. The report thoroughly documented that The Daily Review not only printed the names of domestic violence victims, the paper printed anonymous attacks on citizens. Furthermore, the Editor had rewritten and printed letters-to-the-editor that changed the meaning and accuracy of the letter without obtaining permission from the author. The paper aggressively editorializes its news reporting about candidates for public office. It edited articles to make it seem as if its news staff has interviewed a person when, in fact, this has not happened. The paper regularly plagiarizes material. The Daily Review ran “self-selected polls,” publishing the results as if their polls represented the attitude of the general public. And The Daily Review has used “police blotter journalism” to print lurid details of the attacks on children and adults. Volume II: Within seven days, CPR@DR documented this plagiarism in Volume II of The Ethics of The Daily Review, published September 5, 2000, 21 pages. Several hundred copies of Volume II have been distributed. Since then, we have heard nothing more about legal action from Publisher James Towner. Volume III: The Daily Review publishes the opinion columns of David Motko, a local Bradford County resident. In order to convince Editor and Publisher of The Daily Review that David Motko’s columns are a liability to their paper and harmful to the citizens of Bradford and Sullivan Counties, BCAD has published Evaluation of David Motko’s Writings: A Reflection of The Daily Review’s Ethical Standards, October 2001, 25 pages. Progress to Date (November 2001): Since July 2000, when our first report was published, we have seen the following improvements on the nine unethical editorial practices we addressed in the first two reports. The wholesale plagiarism seems to have stopped; there have been no more self-selected polls; the anonymous attacks on citizens have mostly stopped; and the offensive “police blotter journalism” that provided so much detail about the victimization of children, and so much other information that the victims could be identified even if not named explicitly has declined; but there is still a tabloid tone to the paper. We are not aware of further aggressive editorializing news reporting about candidates for public office since last year; however, we await the next round of elections to see what happens on this issue. |
| |
Publisher James Towner's Requests (January 2002): By email of October 29, 2001, Daily Review Publisher Jim Towner requested that BCAD provide proof that his editor, Ian Fennell, had continued to "delete criticism of The Daily Review, without permission from the author..." since July 2000, when The Ethics of the Daily Review: An Evaluation of its Editorial Practices (Vol. I) was published. BCAD felt that this was a reasonable request. As a result, BCAD has added "Omissions and Deletions" to this website in order to put the additional example in a context that shows the pattern of Editor Fennell's selective editing. On November 1, 2001, Mr. Towner emailed us again, requesting that we correct, "the totally false and inaccurate information that you have distributed concerning the financing of the Review's press & production facility in Towanda Township." We reviewed our statement in Vol. III about the "financing of the Review's press." We agree that it may have been misleading, and we have corrected the sentence in the web editon of Vol. III to indicate "underwritten in part". We were mistaken about the location of the new Daily Review printing plant. It is located in Towanda Township, as Mr. Towner pointed out, not South Towanda. We apologize for this mistake, and have corrected the web edition. Closing Post Script: Progress at The Daily Review November 19, 2002 Mr. Edward J. Lynett Jr., President
RE: Progress at The Daily Review Dear Mr. Ed Lynett,
Yours truly, Clark Moeller
Obtaining Copies of Volumes I - III: All three volumes are posted on this website, can be read in hard copy at the Bradford County Library, or purchased from BCAD (PO Box 131, Burlington PA 18814) for $20, postage paid. The first two volumes were published under the name of Citizens for Press Responsibility @ The Daily Review, an ad hoc citizens group organized by BCAD. The third volume was published by BCAD, which has been involved in community projects since 1995. Contact The Daily Review:
|