Are organizations buying their way onto newspapers news columns?
by Rob Levine
What is the role of a newspaper reporter when dispatched to cover a speech sponsored by an advocacy organization? As an editor at the media watchdog site www.Cursor.org I put this question to reporter Eric Black last year after his coverage of a Center of The American Experiment-sponsored speech by former Independent Prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Should an experienced reporter such as Black flow Starr's words unmediated -- or, "unrebutted" as Black says -- directly onto the paper's news columns? Or should the reporter add some context. Should the reporter spend time trying to find out about the speaker, or the claims he or she makes? In his conversation with me, Black said he was not so obligated.
That very issue arose again last week when the Center sponsored another speech, this time by right wing ideologue William F. Buckley. During his speech, and in an interview with reporter Black, Buckley made a number of statements which he purported as fact, yet were demonstrably -- indeed, easily proven -- false. One involved the proportion of money earned by individuals that is paid to all government, a figure that Buckley put at 44 to 45 percent. More accurate estimations put the true figure closer to 30 percent, making Buckley's rate a full 50 percent too high. Of course, he has his reasons for trying to get people to think they pay more in taxes than they actually do, but that's another story.
Buckley made a similar comment about the percentage of all taxes paid by the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans, a number he put at 95 percent, which turns out to be a gross inflation from the true percentage of about 60 percent, a figure supplied by the Republican-controlled Congressional Budget Office—numbers easily accessible to Black. Neither of Black’s two stories on the Buckley visit even identified either of the comments as controversial. Yet, Black did interject context at other points into the stories, at one point calling Buckley’s right wing sponsored TV show Firing Line "High brow."
Overlooking the partisan and hyperbolic nature of Buckley's comments, the questions arise as to how does and how should a quality newspaper cover such appearances? It seems inadequate to me for a reporter of Black's stature to simply parrot comments made by Buckley into the paper unrebutted, and leave it up to letter writers (such as the one written by Wayne Cox which pointed out the above misstatements) to correct errors. This seems especially true when a news organization has such expert reporters, who in turn have such incredible information resources right at their fingertips. Distortions made by Buckley and others, when reported by a newspaper such as the Star Tribune, have a way of wending themselves through our entire culture, taken falsely as fact by many who read and hear them.