One of the things that pushes a button for me is to read a news article that doesn't include all the necessary information. Needless to say, to leave your reader without important information is not good writing—or reporting.
I remember a couple of years ago a study reported that mega-doses of vitamin C were not healthy. I must have read half a dozen articles based on this report and none of them identified what constituted a mega-dose. I imagine they were all generated from one wire story, perhaps an AP bulletin, that omitted this bit of information and no subsequent reporter or editor took the time to correct it.
An article by staff writer George Hostetter in Thursday's edition of the Fresno Bee commits the same sin. Hostetter's story reports on the ongoing saga of the Running Horse golf course. Running Horse, started a couple of years ago with the promise of a PGA tour event, is now in bankruptcy with only two of the 18 holes completed. A PGA event would be a huge boost to Fresno's national image, to say nothing of its self-image, so it is important to readers of the Bee.
The story has extra drama to it because, a few weeks ago, out of blue, riding a white charger, Donald Trump—yes The Donald—arrived with visions of saving the golf course and building a huge, fancy resort or some similar project around it. (Okay, it wasn't a white charger, but I think his private jet is white.)
According to Hostetter's article, Trump's plan has hit a snag because, Trump feels he needs six additional parcels that were not part of Running Horse's 420 acres. The subtitle to the article is "Six parcels seen as crucial to Fresno's project's viability." It goes on to quote Trump's daughter, Ivanka Trump, his VP of real estate development: "If we can't come to an agreement, [on the six parcels], we say thank you very much, we loved the experience, we loved the city of Fresno. But this is not negotiable for us." Obviously this is a story about six parcels.
However, Hostetter doesn't identify the six parcels, their location relative to the project, or who their owners are. Nor does he say anything about ongoing negotiations for these parcels if there are any. Property ownership is a matter of public record and Hostetter undoubtedly knows how to get the names of the property owners. He should have attempted to contact these owners to learn of their thoughts and intentions.
On the other hand if he for some reason couldn't identify the parcels, he needed to explain that, at press time, this information was not available and why.
In Hostetter's defense, newspaper articles are a team sport and perhaps the night editor didn't have enough column inches available and deleted the necessary information. Whatever, incomplete reporting makes for fewer readers and who among us vying for a seemingly dwindling number of readers has any to spare?
Friday, July 27, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
I agree on your stance regarding incomplete reporting. This is not only true of newspapers, but magazines as well. I recently read an article in a well known publication promoting an elegant destination spot in Santa Barbara, CA. Omitted was a key fact about the original owner of said property whose name contributed to the allure of the place. I wrote a letter to the editor. I received a one hundred dollar check for my letter, which was published. I must admit, this is a good way to ensure the return of readers.
Post a Comment