CASE STUDY:Patriotism in the newsroom
Collegiate Media: KOMU TV, University of Missouri
On September 17, 2001, Stacey Woelfel, KOMU TV8 news director notified staff via email of the station's policy regarding on air displays of symbols for any cause, including patriotism.
“Leave the ribbons at home when reporting or anchoring for KOMU News,” Woelfel's e-mail said. “What you do on your own time is up to you, though I would urge you to consider the fact that you are always 'on the clock' in terms of being known as a reporter and a representative of the station.”
The pressure, both economically and politically, mounted almost immediately. KOMU is owned by the University of Missouri and employs students as interns year round. KOMU is an “auxiliary enterprise” of the University and is funded solely by outside revenue; however, some faculty members who work at the station are funded by the University. Some Republican state representatives said that they would be “evaluating far more carefully state funding that goes to the school of journalism.”
Columbia Public Schools Board of Education member, Don Schoengarth, in a Letter to the Editor stated, “What kind of reporters are we training at the journalism school? Is the goal to produce a bunch of androids with no feelings or independent thoughts, who simply smile and read the teleprompter? If our news media remain neutral, we are providing a great moral victory for bin Laden.”
The e-mails that Woelfel received from legislators and the public on the newsrooms policy ranged from scolding to belligerent. Rep. Rod Jetton of the 156th district said, “I will ask you to PLEASE USE COMMON SENSE. This is not a political dilemma or an ethical one. What our country is facing right now is a test of our survival. This is war and there are evil opponents out there who hate Americans. There will be a winner and a looser. Good people will die!!!” [author’s emphasis]
Tammy Sachse, a member of the public had this to say, “The media staff is responsible for reporting unbiased news, however that should be only unbiased as it relates to the internal workings of the United States. Outside of that, the news media should be very pro US. This lack of support is part of the decay of our nation’s unity that initiated these attacks.” Many of the e-mails were far more menacing; they used foul language and thinly veiled threats directed toward Woelfel. At least two advertisers also removed their spots from KOMU.
Woelfel had adhered to this policy for more than 20 years. He had defended the policy as a matter of journalistic ethics. The faculty at the Missouri School of Journalism voted in early October to defend Woelfel's decision and show their support for the controversial policy. The Curators of the University made the opposite decision, determining that students and employees were allowed to display patriotic symbols. Woelfel stayed consistent with the original policy and did not make any changes despite being at odds with the University.
Ultimately, the State Legislature decided to withhold some $50 thousand from the University because of Woelfel’s decision.
CASE STUDY QUESTIONS
- Do you believe that Woelfel’s decision was correct? Why or why not?
- Are their any circumstances under which it might be acceptable for journalists to show bias? If there are, why would it be acceptable?
- Put these levels of obligation in the order you believe they should go for working journalists: human being, citizen, professional.
