Covering tragedy is a delicate balance of interests
By Larry Lough - SVN Executive Editor - llough@svnmail.com
What’s the hardest part of an editor’s job?
This editor has been asked that question many times.
The answer is easy: Reporting on death and dying.
If something in an obituary is wrong, no matter whose fault it is, the newspaper is responsible.
If someone is upset about information we printed or a photograph we published after a tragic death, the newspaper is responsible.
That’s not a complaint. That’s just a reality in the news business.
Dealing with understandably distraught family and friends in the aftermath of a death is often difficult.
Even writing this column about the subject is bound to make some people uneasy.
But it’s all part of our job.
NEWS ABOUT death and tragedy poses a problem for us because of conflicting interests.
On one hand, the public is extremely interested in details about crime, accidents, fires and other matters that could reasonably be labeled as “bad news.”
Think otherwise? Check the “Most Viewed” news stories on our Web site any day.
This past couple of weeks, the most popular articles have involved a double homicide in Ashton, a fatal car wreck west of Dixon, a double fatality west of Sterling, a one-car accident north of Oregon that killed an Ogle County man, the arrest of a Dixon man on a charge of aggravated criminal sexual abuse ...
That kind of news interests readers and causes newspapers to sell out at vending boxes and convenience stores. Readers know they can turn to us for information about those events.
On the other hand, we want to avoid unduly adding to the pain of family and friends who are grieving. For them, sometimes, any newspaper coverage is unwelcome.
How does a newspaper provide information that readers want and need without offending or upsetting anyone?
Well, it often doesn’t.
AS YOU can see from the news of recent days, this newspaper has reported on several tragic events.
We received some complaints (five e-mails and a phone call) about the front page photograph from the aftermath of the wreck along state Route 2 in front of Sauk Valley Community College.
A woman died when her car ran into the back of a semitrailer. The photo showed how the car’s top had been peeled back as it went under the truck. The photo showed no blood, no gore, in keeping with the practice of most newspapers in reporting at accident scenes.
But a white sheet covered the driver’s seat, presumably hiding the body of the victim from the view of passers-by.
Some readers were offended that our photo showed that sheet.
“Completely insensitive and disrespectful,” Michele wrote.
Carol was “appalled at your total lack of human decency.”
Sarah called it “despicable and disgusting.”
The photo was one of many we had from the scene. We chose that one for publication because it described, better than words could, the accident scene, and it did so without gory images.
“You don’t put photos of every accident in your paper, so why this one?” Amy asked. “Just so you can sell a few more papers?”
We don’t get a photographer to every accident scene, and not every accident photo can explain the event so well.
Yes, news sells newspapers. But we’ve never heard of anyone who bought a newspaper because of an accident photo.
We can imagine a photo – in fact, we’ve seen many – that would horrify anyone if it were published. But we don’t print that kind.
Obviously, that doesn’t mean no one is offended by the photos we do choose to print.
IN A LONG e-mail, Megan explained that her grandfather died in a traffic accident many years ago. A front page newspaper story “made it worse,” she said.
“It was no one else’s business but our [family’s],” she wrote. “I understand when something like this happens others want to know. To me, a smaller article on the inside of the paper would be more appropriate. This does not need to be splattered across the front of the paper, in large print, with disgusting pictures.”
We don’t think it’s morbid curiosity that drives readers to bad news. We think it’s a genuine desire to understand what happened.
Of course, readers are always interested in finding out whether they know someone involved. But they also look for explanations for why things happen, to find out whether something can be learned from those events.
This newspaper sometimes reports on the reactions to tragedy, as we did this week from Newman Central Catholic High School. In a span of 4 days, local traffic accidents claimed the life of a student’s mother, and then of a student.
We tried to be sensitive to all involved, while still providing readers with coverage of a story that was the talk not only of the school, but of the town.
That, too, is what newspapers do.
AS ALWAYS, we are sorry for the loss of loved ones in such tragedies.
And we apologize if our coverage offended anyone, as can happen in those situations where emotions already are raw with grief.
We try to serve our readers in a responsible manner, though we recognize not everyone will agree with all of our decisions.
We also know this won’t be the last time we get angry e-mails and phone calls.
That’s part of the job.
No one said it would be easy.
