I wish journalists everywhere would read the column headlined “Spitzer’s Media Enablers” in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal.
It was written by Kimberley A. Strassel, who covered the well-publicized investigations of Eliot Spitzer, the former New York prosecutor and governor who fell from grace this week after hiring high-priced call girls. Strassel writes the Journal’s Potomac Watch column from Washington and is a member of the paper’s editorial board.
She builds a great case on how most reporters who covered him were his accomplices. Giddy with delight at his prosecution of Wall Street big-wigs, journalists felt obligated to run with whatever “scoops” he handed to them without stopping to question whether he was using his power to punish and even destroy private citizens.
Journalists and ivory-tower professors spend hours and sometimes even entire industry conventions debating among themselves ethical issues such as how to cover politicians and others involved in sex crimes (see “Framing Your Spitzer Coverage: Issues and Questions”) and little time addressing the obvious bias the Wall Street Journal column discusses.
Joan,
I thought it was particularly interesting last night’s Entertainment Tonight– they did a top list of all time best summer romance films.
What was the one they profiled last night?
Pretty Woman.
Then, 3 minutes later, in an unrelated story they talked about Spitzer. I just think it’s amusing that film and people romanticize the rich men paying for a prostitute’s services, and how they both found love. NO one addressed Richard Gere’s personal life in that movie. And how life imitates art and it’s a much different story.
I read yesterday’s article in the Wall Street Journal about reporters serving as accomplices to Spitzer. It was a chilling commentary that gave me pause.
This is a must-read for journalism students and others involved in working with and for the media. If ever there was a time to focus more squarely on doing the right thing, this is it.