General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSeeking opinions: should media do background checks to find controversy in even feel good stories?
That's the debate that's been going on in Iowa this week after the Des Moines Register, when profiling a 24-year-old who had raised hundreds of thousands of dollars (now millions) for an Iowa Children's Hospital, decided to include in that profile a reference to 2 offensive tweets he had made 8 years prior when he was a 16-year-old sophomore, referencing the Tosh.0 show on Comedy Central.
There's a lot more to this story, including the doxxing of the reporter himself for even more offensive tweets he had in his past (he's since been fired), but the Des Moines Register has doubled down and defended its background check practice (claiming they did it for 'the public good' and that readers insist on 'the whole story') and the editors that had approved the story are keeping their jobs unscathed. They've said very little about the hypocrisy of doing such thorough checks on the subjects of their stories but not on their own reporters.
What's everybody's thoughts on this practice? I can maybe see why you would do it on certain types of stories/subjects, but let's say someone saves a bus full of Girl Scouts from a fiery accident. Before writing that story, should the newspaper spend a bunch of time digging into the past of the rescuer to find out if they've ever done anything controversial?
For good measure, another ironic twist: Anheuser-Busch was originally heavily involved in the fundraiser, but backed out on parts of it after the tweets came out. Internet sleuths dug into it and found that Anheuser-Busch was, ironically, a sponsor of Tosh.0, the very show the kid quoted. They're holding him accountable for quoting a show they themselves sponsored...
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)50 Shades Of Blue
(9,988 posts)I've never even heard of the Tosh.o show so I'd have to know what it is and what he said about it. OTOH, he was 16, not an adult.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)I don't buy the "readers need the whole story" bag.
I have never read an article on someone and thought, "boy I wish I knew every single thing this person ever did in their entire life, especially the bad stuff."
This reporter went back through EIGHT years of social media posts to find these two tweets.
With the public now having knowledge of that kind of practice, aren't they pretty much guaranteeing that almost nobody will want to talk to them about anything, even when on its face the story itself should be a very positive one? EVERYBODY has skeletons.
50 Shades Of Blue
(9,988 posts)Harker
(14,015 posts)they're fair game.
If they wish to remain anonymous, they should be free to do so, I think.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)You'd be comfortable giving them your name knowing that this kind of background checking is apparently standard practice for even the most minor stories?
You have a whole lot cleaner life than the rest of us do.
Harker
(14,015 posts)Anybody digging into my past would find plenty of crumbs under my rug. I don't present myself as a great man of virtue, that's for sure. I try, though.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)On that note Tosh.0 is a horrible show I'm surprised it is still on the air.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)It wasn't until this last story that they decided to bust that information out.
MuseRider
(34,108 posts)what a horrible show!
MuseRider
(34,108 posts)to witness our old selves and own up to it. It is called growth.
If you admit it, talk about it and show your growth that is a positive for all.
If it is brought up and you make excuses then you really need to think about your real feelings and thoughts on the matter now.
If you own up, then deny, then seek others to blame, then deny etc. etc. you have not grown up and are not likely to be trustworthy.
Growing up is hard and we rarely make people do it anymore. I had a very hard opportunity to do it once and I did it. It was hard, then I grew up.
This is JMO however.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)They only brought up the 8-year-old tweets.
MuseRider
(34,108 posts)to address that.
Some people start out in a way that guides them poorly. Even though they are doing good things now their past is unavoidable. I think this would be a good lesson for a lot of people.
I don't really think being humiliated is fun or funny but it can be handled with the right attitude.
A kid made some bad remarks. Really? That is how they want to hurt this guy who is apparently doing really good things? It is a very sad world we live in.
I was asked once to run for a small office in my county. All I could think about was my iffy past and how I would not want that drug out and aired so I declined. It felt cowardly to do that when it would have been a good opportunity to shrug and give the story and move on. I do not think there is a thing we can do about this anymore, it is all available to anyone who wants to knock you down. It is now our job to evaluate these things by the responses I guess. It really sucks.
caraher
(6,278 posts)It serves no public good (the press and its freedoms are about maintaining an informed citizenry, not voyeurism)
Every person is much more than their own weakest moment or most regrettable words.
Don't we want people to show growth, change, improvement? To be able to put their best foot forward and overcome past failings? What matters in something like this is the good thing the person is doing today.
lame54
(35,287 posts)Contacted the guy so his apology could be included in the story
Not blind-side him like they did
Harker
(14,015 posts)The world is full of shills and phonies.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)They should keep an eye on the story going forward. Remember when two people raised a ton of money for a homeless man, and it turned out to be a big fraud? Also, the guy raising money to build the wall. When that began to look suspicious, they dug into his background, but not before there were red flags.
This practice might deter people from doing good deeds. A lot of people "turn their lives around" at some point. We do want to encourage that.