M**oL ~.*>iJp- ^Jj%
vr>
CHARNLEY BB DRUN AVENUE S.1J. MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 55414
Feb. 13, 1980
The Editor
Harper's Magaz ine
2 Park Avenue
New York, N. Y. 10016
Mr. Watson's criticism of news media treatment of the Greensboro shootout ("Media Martyrdom," March) is sober, well-documented, and fte&gjhfcem-
ing. But it's also something else: an impressive model of the kind of
reportingtSiat the press could do, and ought to do, after an event.
T<» say that the press is often superficial, incomplete, or plain wrong
in reporting fast-breaking news is routine; like many bromides, it's
also accurate. But there are reasons. Watson shows how many versions
of the Greensboro shooting and demonstrations surfaced, how the events
were engineered by participants to make sure TV and the newspapers would
be on hand; he shows that for hours, even weeks, it was impossible for
a fact-gatherer to get all his facts in sure order. And the foolish
urgency under which news workers suffer makes it pretty certain that
accuracy is often only lucky chance. (How long was it after the New
Mexico prison riots that we knew for sure how many died?) The media
persist in the principle that getting to their customers first is more
important than getting to them error-free. Unfortunately, "improvements"
in communication processes are likely to enhance speed but not factuality. That readers and viewers have been conditioned — by the media
themselves — to demand news fast and first is not rational excuse.
More important: "Media Martyrdom" is exactly the kind of reporting that
a hundred newsrooms could undertake. They could do the job as expertly
as Watson does it. Investigative and interpretive reporting are cherished nonpareils of today's journalism. Neither kind can be produced
under the gun — they take time, money,, effort, and even a certain
portion of wisdom, such stories as, for example, Anthony Lukas's 1967
New York Times exploration into the delicacies and dynamics of the
death of a rich, talented Greenwich, conn., girl don't come easy,
they're not cheap, they eat up space and scoff at deadlines. And so
they're not common. But when we get them we're a lot closer to knowing what happened, and why, than we'd be if we had only who, where,
and when.
Mitchell V. Charnley /T
Professor of journalism, 3
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minnesota
