The fact that the mayor was on gay.com was not news, it was his personal business. However, if the mayor was doing anything illegal on gay.com, then it becomes newsworthy because he is an elected official.
2) Morlin justified the use of a concealed identity on gay.com because it was the only way to find out if Mayor West was actually the man on the site. Morlin couldn't create the assumed identity because he said it went against the newspaper's ethics standards.
3) The Spokesman probably published as many stories as they did about Mayor West in part because they broke the story. Since so many other media outlet picked it up, however, it then became a battle for them to continue to own the story and be the main source of information.
It was also in part due to the fact that the paper and the setting for the improprieties both were in Spokane. This is something the paper probably felt was directly relevant to the interest of its readers.
4) Ideally, you would hope the residents of Spokane benefited from the decision to expose Mayor West. Mayor West was hurt by the decision, but overall I would say it was worth it.
I think the Spokesman should have gathered more reliable sources before implicating West in pedophilia, that story seemed like a bit of a stretch and a little sketchy to me, but the investigations into misuse of office were justified.
If West was using positions with city hall as payments for sexual favors, that is something the residents of Spokane have a right to know and should be made aware of.
The use of an undercover sting operation is also questionable, especially because much of the reasoning for it seemed to be for uncovering pedophilia. My biggest criticism of the entire investigation is that the Spokesman seemed too readily to believe that West molested young boys. They didn't want to see if it was proven with their investigation, it seemed, but rather use the investigation to prove that their hunch was true.
Even after West didn't go after the 17-year-old boy, they continued with the undercover operation.
5) I would say this story is a bit of a stretch, almost like the paper is patting itself on the back. They write the article with the assumption that Lynch's leave verifies the paper's original report. The story talks about all the different questions that haven't been answered, but despite the lack of answers, the paper ran with the story anyway.
It doesn't take much to imagine what readers are going to assume when they read the story, but the paper gives no hard evidence to support the assumptions. It should have waited to have stronger evidence before moving forward with story with so much potential to do damage if incorrect.
There is definitely a story, and something worth reporting on, but the paper also has a responsibility to proceed with caution. I think they should have exercised a little more in this story.
5) I would say this story is a bit of a stretch, almost like the paper is patting itself on the back. They write the article with the assumption that Lynch's leave verifies the paper's original report. The story talks about all the different questions that haven't been answered, but despite the lack of answers, the paper ran with the story anyway.
It doesn't take much to imagine what readers are going to assume when they read the story, but the paper gives no hard evidence to support the assumptions. It should have waited to have stronger evidence before moving forward with story with so much potential to do damage if incorrect.
There is definitely a story, and something worth reporting on, but the paper also has a responsibility to proceed with caution. I think they should have exercised a little more in this story.
No comments:
Post a Comment