« "Malaise Man" Criticizes Blair | Main | SHOCK: It Wasn't Karr »
August 28, 2006
Little White Lies, Big Problem
Greg Mitchell, the editor in chief of Editor & Publisher magazine recently made an odd admission.
Since the press seems to be in full-disclosure mode these days, I want to finally come clean. Back in 1967, when I was 19 and worked for the Niagara Falls (N.Y.) Gazette (now the Niagara Gazette) as a summer intern, our city editor asked me to find out what tourists thought about an amazing local event: Engineers had literally "turned off" the famous cataracts, diverting water so they could shore up the crumbling rock face. Were visitors disappointed to find a trickle rather than a roar? Or thrilled about witnessing this once-in-a-lifetime stunt?Instead of doing his job, Mitchell admits he made up some quotes and turned a fabricated story into his editors. Now, it seems Mitchell has taken an embarrasing story and turned it into a minor scandal.I never found out. Oh, I went down to the falls, all right, but when I got there, I discovered that I just could not wander up to strangers (even dorky ones wearing funny hats and knee socks) and ask them for their personal opinions, however innocuous. It was a puffball assignment, but that wasn't why I rebelled. I just could not bring myself to do it.
When I got my first reporting job, I was assigned to do a feature called the "Question of the Week." Every week, I had to go ask six strangers a stupid question and take their picture. I hated this job and was nervous at first about going up to total strangers and asking them about their favorite ice cream, or about their plans for a particular holiday.
Sure, I was nervous, but I did my job because that's what I was being paid to do. It's clear that Mitchell did not hold to the same ethical standards, and committed the worst sin in journalism - he fabricated part of a news story. Sure, it was "just" about Niagara Falls, but in making things up, he broke faith with his employers, his readers and the ethics of the profession he chose.
Now, it seems he is changing the tale to make himself sound more innocent, but his changes are just as false as the original quotes he wrote when he was a cub reporter. Mitchell's disgraceful behavior makes me realize why he defended Reuters 'fauxtography' with such vehemence.
Mitchell's ethical lapses may seem minor, but the fact remains that Editor & Publisher magazine, the trade publication of journalism, has an admitted fabricator leading it. Will the owners do anything to rectify this situation, or will they allow their magazine's good reputation to be destroyed by a man who has used it as his own personal megaphone to criticize those who are watching the "watchdogs?"
(h/t: Ace)
Posted by slublog at August 28, 2006 12:00 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.slublog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2537
Comments
Following some of the links, it seems he was 21 years-old, not 19, and he was a "real" reporter, not simply an intern.
Posted by: Old Coot at August 28, 2006 10:11 AM
Eh!
These charges may indeed seem minor, because they ARE minor. This event is 35 years old.
Sure, I agree that manufacturing false quotes, along with plaigarism, are both bad things. That said, I give people a pass (depending on the violation, of course) if the offense happens when they're young and stupid.
After all, being stupid is what being young is all about.
Look at Ben Domenich, for example.
Of course, if it turns out that there's a pattern of making things up over the course of years...then that changes everything.
Posted by: shingles aka clappy at August 28, 2006 03:59 PM
Well, I've been a young journalist and have been tempted to commit the same sins, and I didn't, so youth and inexperience don't really cut it with me.
Posted by: Slublog at August 28, 2006 04:44 PM