Print

 Email

Newsroom Editors & Contributor Opinions

Newsroom Failed To Make Clear Its Motives

Q I was offended by your editorial attacks on PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. I’ve been in this business for a good many years – long enough to know that the only journalistically sound news available on television today is produced by MacNeil/Lehrer. Frankly I don’t understand why you, or anyone else gives a damn about how they spend what precious resources they can raise. Have you reconsidered your opinion?

A About two thirds of Newsroom Magazine readers who made their views known said they disagreed with our position. We were not surprised. A small minority attacked us for belittling the best hour of news on television – something we definitely did not do. To the contrary, ours was a voice of support that touched on broad issues about accountability and credibility. Disclosing how funds are raised and expended is central to maintaining public trust in a nation that increasingly believes that journalists are neither trustworthy or honorable.

Our freedoms as individuals and as a nation are at risk today. To some degree this is due to the erosion of Journalistic standards in both broadcast and print media. But there are other reasons as well. As a nation we are turning more frivolous even as forces beyond our borders threaten our solvency, personal livelihoods and national security.

The time will come, perhaps soon, when Americans will discover real and present dangers at home and abroad which have been obscured by entertainment values, obsessions du-jour, and celerity-driven news content. Should that happen, people will seek news sources whose credibility has not been tarnished by failing editorial standards, undue outside influences, issues of financial propriety, or pandering to garner financial support.

Disclosure Issues

We believe that PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer and MacNeil/Lehrer Productions have not conformed their business operations to their journalistic standards. Financial disclosure would clear up any misunderstandings about their financial sources and expenditures. Such disclosure would clear the air by answering reasonable questions about any potential issues relating to foundations and sponsors who have a perceived special interest. We cite, only as an example, NewsHour support from the Poetry Foundation which is occasionally manifested by inclusion of poetic content or materials in an otherwise probative news broadcast. Our point isn’t that poetic expression is unimportant, nor do we believe that the Poetry Foundation has any hidden agendas. Our point is only that if one of the smaller foundational supporters has demonstrable influence over NewsHour content, what influence arises from the other sources of funding?

We have no reason to suspect that there is any connection, but absent public disclosure, others now, or in the future, may question these issues. Circling the wagons to defend unnecessary secrecy will not sustain. We believe that our suggestion to MacNeil/Lehrer Productions to start disclosure now is positive and constructive suggestion — not a recrimination.

We assume that there is no impropriety, and that there is no editorial influence exerted for the benefit of sponsoring companies and foundations. We believe that failure to disclose both income and expenditures may lead some to think that MacNeil/Lehrer has something to hide.

For these reasons, we believe that the time to clear the air is now.

Robert Butche
Publisher
Newsroom Magazine