On Wednesday, Bill Turque, the Washington Post’s education beat reporter, posted an excellent blog item showing his readers a little bit of the inside game at his paper. It was titled “One Newspaper, Two Stories”—a title that, by the end of the day, would become more apt than Turque ever could have expected.

That’s because editors pulled the post off the site Wednesday night, replacing it hours later with a new, dialed-back version.

via The Washington Post Scrubs a Post about the Post : CJR.

So how much free speech is free when your own editors re-write and don’t indicate that they changed your work? Sure some editing is part of an editor’s job but an opinion article that no longer expresses the writer’s opinion seems to be off track.

What do you think?

Share on Facebook

Here are two examples…

The Sun Journal newspaper reported that photographer Russ Dillingham was credited with helping police capture 35-year-old Norman Thompson as he tried to flee from local police and federal agents.

via News Photographer Tackles, Apprehends Fugitive on the Loose -

And in the recent coverage of Haiti’s Earthquake recovery…

Several media ethics scholars have criticized the broadcast and cable news networks for allowing their medical correspondents to be shown performing emergency treatment in Haiti.

via Contactmusic.com

The way I see it is that it’s more a matter of the purpose of the journalist’s intrusion into the story. If it is to get more viewers or to promote the journalist’s company or commercial interests, then I think it is completely inappropriate. If it is a human responding to a need or reacting to a situation, then I’m really quite accepting of the intrusion. It should still be reported clearly that the journalist was involved, but I don’t see this as a case of unethical behavior. I see it as human behavior kicking in. Honestly, it’s refreshing to see that journalists out there still have humanity’s reactions working in them!

Remember Kevin Carter? He became notorious for not getting involved after he left an emaciated Sudanese girl under the watch of a vulture after photographing the pair in Africa. Even after winning a Pulitzer Prize in 1994, the things Carter saw especially in Africa be came too much for him to deal with and he took his own life.

While I worked as a journalist/photographer for the Fort Scott Tribune, I found myself feeling like I new all the details but I could do little to make a difference. Yet, those time when I did “only” right about things, the encouraging words of a reader or the public official who later told me of the response they received after an article I wrote were excellent reminders that even an unbiased report can stir people to action simply because a journalist did his or her job…informed the people.

Thoughts?

Share on Facebook

In grad school, I studied Attitude Theory under Dr. Hamilton at Pittsburg State University‘s Communication Department. Below is the second part of my response to a final question about persuasion and human attitude theory.

Click here to read Part One

—–

Let’s return to the persuasion techniques suggested by the literature. First, consider rational arguments. By appealing to the rational mind of the reader, the editor is able to suggest reasons for thinking a certain way and therefore argue why the reader should accept the new viewpoint or take a suggested action. Secondly, consider assertiveness. Using an assertive approach, the editor can tell the readers why they need to take on the new mindset or action. Often this assertive approach uses fear or dislike within the reader to bolster the arguments.

For example: An editor writing against a proposed nuclear power plant in the area could use assertive statements like, “The threat of nuclear contamination would be playing in our own backyards.” This statement could prey upon fears the reader may already be experiencing. However, for the highly involved readers who think this would not be a threat or have been convinced that the plant is highly beneficial for economic reasons, such arguments could cause them to swing to the rational argument that the assertive fear-inducing argument of the editor is simply not reasonable. Therefore, they might conclude, the editor himself is not a credible source for information.

Another technique is exchange. While related to assertiveness, exchange focuses more on providing direction for the reasoning or concerns of the reader Exchange techniques in editorials help readers see the problem or argument at hand while immediately suggesting an outcome that relieves those fears or provides an outcome that answers the concerns of the reader while directing them toward the editors viewpoint.

In light of the techniques suggested by the literature, consider the steps that scholars Zimbardo and Lieppe suggest for persuasion. These same steps would apply to developing an editorial campaign: 

First, the literature calls for exposure to the message. Without exposure to the message, obviously, the receiver could not consider it’s content. The editorial campaign must expose the readers to the concepts it is trying to convey.

Secondly, the editor must get the reader to pay attention to that message. This is more than a catchy headline. Attention is attained when the reader diverts his attention to the message and not merely the form in which the message is presented.

The third step is comprehension. If the reader does not comprehend or understand the message they are very likely not to pay attention very long and their exposure to the message soon is eliminated as well. One factor contributing to comprehension involves knowing the audience that will be exposed to the message. The better the editor prepares the message the more likely it will have a chance at being comprehended by readers.

After the message has been comprehended, the reader is at a transition point. If the attempt at persuasion is successful, the reader will accept the message and quickly move to the next point of retaining the attitudes presented. 

As this process is completed, the persuaded reader will take on the new attitude or mindset and either maintain it within themselves, promote it with others and therefore reinforcing the message in their own minds, become moved to action, or face new influences in the form of arguments against the new attitude and become dissuaded from their position.

This step-by-step theoretical process presented by Zimbardo and Lieppe along with an understanding of the techniques of rational appeal, assertiveness, and exchange and when to use them are helpful in preparing an editor for embarking on a potentially influential editorial campaign.

Considering the editorials that I have read or written, there are several thatI would consider successful though I will qualify this success. I once wrote an editorial entitled “Would the real teachers please stand” after experience a unsuccessful interview with a group of teachers who expressed fear about confronting the U.S.D. 234 school board over salary contracts or even putting their own names to their concerns. While the responses I received were positive and the teachers did eventually “stand up” for what they were pursuing salary wise. I consider this editorial successful not because I am proud enough to believe that my writing skills and persuasive words were the sole cause for teachers to take action. I consider this editorial successful because I got my message -- teachers are scared and here’s why — out to the public in a manner that would not have been possible on the news pages of the paper. In part my purpose was also to publicly tell the teachers they needed to get some backbone and believe in themselves if they really felt so strongly about what they told me, so I was glad to see them respond but I am cautious to attribute their actions solely to my editorial influence.

While I cannot think of an example of an unsuccessful editorial off hand, I would describe an unsuccessful editorial as an editorial that readers consider irrelevant because of faulty arguments or because the editor fails to gain enough attention to maintain enough of the audience to receive a response. One thing to consider when evaluating the effectiveness of an audience is to consider whether the editor’s purpose was fulfilled. As I learned in my study, editorials may have many different purposes (i.e. incite response, cause attitude changes, incite action, inform, etc.). With a variety of purposes, anyone evaluating editorials needs to understand the purpose of the editorials as individuals before those editorials can be properly and accurately evaluated as successful or not.

Share on Facebook

——

The debate about persuasion is one that theorists have long been questioning and the debate is still out. However, my research shows that there are techniques that at least help bring the recipient closer to a place of persuasion. According to my research concerning editorials and persuasion, editors and scholars have a variety of opinions about whether editorials should attempt to persuade readers to a certain point of view.

Through a survey of editors in the Midwest and research in the literature, I found that there are specific purposes for editorial pages. The three purposes were as follows:

• First, to provide a public service to the readers. That is, to provide the reader with an admittedly subjective look at a topic that is in the interest of the public mind.
• Secondly, editorials are an influence tool used to persuade the audience of readers to a specific point of view. (There are some editorials that are not attempting to persuade but they are attempts to get the readers riled or upset enough to get a response. These editorials typically take a strong view of a particularly controversial topic and are not usually trying to persuade but to simply increase reader involvement and thought.
• Thirdly, editorials have a two-fold purpose: to reflect and to lead public opinion.

In the non-scientific survey that I used to question editors, I found that editors often related an editorial that they said persuaded people to act in a certain manner. This suggests that people can be persuaded, but I think this is glorifying the ability of editorials a little much and down playing the rational mind of readers. I agree that editorials can have an influence on the thinking patterns of readers and contribute toward a persuasion, but I have yet to see any study that eliminates the many variables involved in such a public attempt at persuasion as editorials. Therefore, I concede that editorials can be contributing factors toward persuasion, but I would provide rebuttal to the editors examples. One Joplin Globe editor said they wrote an editorial about city police officers patrolling on I-44. The police department later changed its policy (the editor attributed this change to his editorial), but I suggest that by placing issues in the public eye, the fear of public disapproval or even the lash of the public tongue is more influential than the actual editorial itself. Yes, this is part of the process that caused the persuasion to change but a sole contributing factor? I don’t agree.

While research shows that editorial pages are the second most highly read pages in newspapers, I suggest from my own experience that the people who read the editorials carefully are those who are highly involved in the issues addressed in the editorials they read. The research shows that those highly involved people are more likely to develop counter-arguments to the arguments toward a certain viewpoint proposed by the editor.

Therefore, the consequences of attempting to persuade high-involved audiences is more likely to be negative rather than positive. Still, there are many readers who may be persuaded. Research suggests that there are several persuasion techniques to use:

• Rational arguments,
• Passionate appeals, and
• Even by presentation of a topic that they expect to have to discuss in the future.

Before delving into these and other persuasion techniques that I found while studying the literature surrounding editorial attempts at attitude change, consider four suggested designs for presenting an editorial message in a persuasive form:

• First, is brevity. Keeping messages brief, to the point and on the message help the readers focus exactly where the editorial is trying to guide them. This helps eliminate distracting peripherals that would weaken the message.
• Second is to have an attention getting factor. This may be a story, example or short example that captures the attention of the readers and draws them into the reasoning that follows for a specific way of thinking. Attention getting qualities relates to the third design–show not tell. Again this is part of maintaining the attention of the reader throughout the entire editorial thought. The idea of show not tell is that examples and stories are used to get the message across rather than only directing by declarative statements that may come across as too forceful.
• Another design that the literature suggests as being part of an effective editorial is information that becomes part of the long-term memory of the individual. Research shows that if a reader thinks information will be used in a future discussion of the topic they are more likely to retain that information and as they retain that information they are more likely to integrate that information into their own attitude toward the topic. In effect, this long-term memory may be a strong contributor to persuasion in individuals who retain that information.

Anyone who has experience in mass media studies or field, will probably recognize the above design factors as part of the design used in news or feature stories as well. In keeping with the journalism style, editors carry this same style to the editorial page.

Go on to Part 2 to read the conclusion of this discussion.

Share on Facebook

1. Get past the pros. The professionals are great for the stats and figures and they even have anecdotes that get you closer, but if you don’t let them introduce you to the real people who are directly affected by the issue you’re covering, you can get stuck showing your readers the forest. By stepping closer you can show them things like: the family that can’t pay their winter gas bill, the farmer who’s corn is turning brown because of the drought, the 28-year-old who’s just signed a mortgage on a condo in a tax-free zone and bring those numbers into vivid color. Many times the “pros” can put you in touch with the real people who are affected. Then, you can tell their stories and help the stats and figures come to life.
2. Let your feet do some walking. Sure your fingers are faster, but there’s nothing like getting down in the action and walking through the neighborhoods. Get out of that car and walk around the block. You’ll meet people and you’ll find stories you can’t get in a drive-by.
3. Take the time. The relationships that I build with time tend to be the ones that keep providing me with valuable tips and open doors. Because of a relationship I had, I was once invited to be the only media present when two Vietnam war buddies met and cried with a family. The veterans had come to share the story of how that family’s brother and son had died beside them some 20 years prior and it was the first time for the family to hear the story. Several years after that story, I ended up getting a personal account story from that same family from a son who had been in New York City on September 11th, 2001.
4. See again for the first time. Whether it’s that street festival or the city budget meetings, try to look at it with the fresh eyes of someone who’s seeing it for the first time. It works for photographers and it works for writers, but sometimes it just takes work to see it with a fresh perspective. I’d covered the school board’s battle with the teacher’s union for months, but when I stepped closer and investigated pay and benefit rates compared with surrounding districts, I was able to show people more than an ongoing debate and let them see the reality of the situation.

————–<p>Michael Shead is a photojournalist and writer with experience in small town journalism as well as  international video documentaries. He serves as Communications Director at Resurrection Life Church in Grandville, Michigan. He also teaches photojournalism at Cornerstone University.

Share on Facebook