'Quote approval' crosses an ethical line

Editorials

Discussion

COMMENTING ON STORIES:

Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.

Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.

Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.

RULES OF CONDUCT:

We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:

1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.

WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:

1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.

WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:

1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.

WE WELCOME:

1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.

MONITORING:

We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time (including weekends) will be sporadic.

comments powered by Disqus

August 11, 2012

'Quote approval' crosses an ethical line

Anonymous Daily Star The Daily Star Sat Aug 11, 2012, 03:25 AM EDT

The New York Times raised eyebrows recently with a report about the rise of a questionable practice in journalism called quote approval.

Reporters seeking to cover President Barack Obama and challenger Mitt Romney have frequently been offered interviews only after agreeing to submit quotes to the campaigns for approval before printing them. With this stipulation -- dubbed "revise and consent" by Carl Sessions Stepp of American Journalism Review -- the campaigns can rigidly adhere to their message despite occasional slips of the tongue.

"Jim Messina, the Obama campaign manager, can be foul-mouthed," the Times' Jeremy Peters wrote. "But readers would not know it because he deletes the curse words before approving the quotes. … Stuart Stevens, the senior Romney strategist, is fond of disparaging political opponents by quoting authors like Walt Whitman and referring to historical figures like H.R. Haldeman, Richard Nixon's chief of staff. But such clever lines rarely make it past Mr. Stevens."

For journalists to be complicit in sanitizing their sources' statements is ethically dubious. But with media outlets such as Bloomberg News, The Washington Post, Reuters and the New York Times agreeing to quote approval, a "go along to get along" attitude is often the only way to gain access to those who make the news.

"We don't like the practice," New York Times Managing Editor Dean Baquet said. "We encourage our reporters to push back. Unfortunately, this practice is becoming increasingly common, and maybe we have to push back harder."

The Associated Press, to its credit, has taken a firm stance against the practice. (The same goes for The Daily Star.)

"We don't permit quote approval. We have declined interviews that have come with this contingency." AP bureau chief Sally Buzbee said to the Poynter Institute.

Quote approval can be useful for stories involving, for example, scientists who use esoteric technical jargon. But, as former Bush administration press secretary Ari Fleischer said in a CNN op-ed this week, such is not the case for the vast majority of sources who demand quote approval.

"Pushback has now turned into quote approval for everyone, even when the story isn't nuanced or complicated," Fleischer wrote. "Reporters are easily acquiescing to midlevel aides who seek quote approval. … As a former press secretary, I'm all for trying to control the press, but quote approval goes too far."

The relationship between reporters and sources will always be part-collegial, part-adversarial. But this give-and-take crosses the line when coddling sources is raised to greater importance than providing readers with honest coverage.