Wednesday
Editor in chief: Jack Clifford
Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard
Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
P-O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu
EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL J. KLECKNER opededitor@journalist.com
Consumers should get to know their sources
Tell us this: Who qualifies as a “jour
nalist”? And now, who qualifies as
“media”? What’s the difference?
And who should get to film the ac
tivities of police on public property?
These questions were raised again in Eu
gene on the Saturday before Halloween,
when Tim Lewis and Steven Heslin were re
moved from a University parking lot with
out a reason by the Department of Public
Safety and the Eugene Police Department.
The two men, working for Cascadia Alive!,
were filming the DPS as they dealt with al
cohol violations.
Over the past couple of years, these ques
tions have been asked more loudly, as inde
pendent media find it harder to cover police
activities and people question if they really
qualify as journalists.
For the sake of journalism, and the right of
the public to know what goes on in their
community, all types of media must be al
lowed access. Neither law enforcement
agencies nor local governments should be
allowed to determine who is a journalist.
That’s the job of news consumers. By the
same token, activists cannot use their cre
dentials as “media” to get involved in con
frontations between police and activists.
Such behavior also threatens the free press,
and such activists rightly run the risk of be
ing arrested, as does any citizen.
Independent media outlets like CopWatch
and Cascadia Alive! are often treated more
as watchdog groups than as news opera
tions. Their agenda is questioned and their
actions closely monitored. But the police
don’t seem to question the agenda of local
news outlets, even though many studies
have shown that the public does sense a bias
in mainstream media.
Mainstream journalists do their utmost to
appear fair and balanced, even if the term
“objective” is used less and less these days.
No one is completely objective; it’s not pos
sible to remove the filters of life experiences
when reporting. Fair and balanced seems to
be a happy medium between biased and ob
jective, but even as journalists choose how
to present a story and what “sides” of the is
sue to cover, they exercise their prejudices,
if unwittingly.
Independent media outlets don’t always
use the same “fair and balanced” standard.
They don’t have to, as there is no licensing
procedure for journalists and no formalized
media industry standards to adhere to.
Some independent media outlets are un
abashedly biased.
At www.indymedia.org, anyone can file
reports and submit videotape of activist
events, like the WTO meeting in Seattle or
the political conventions this summer. Pro
testers involved in the event are often doing
the reporting, and they’re not pretending to
call police headquarters and get a quote to
show they’re unbiased.
So when do the police have the right to
stop these media from fdming or remove
them from the scene? After all, these videog
raphers may not be getting all sides of the
story. We hope the police never have the
right to remove them, unless they are com
mitting a crime. Then remove them like any
other criminal. But the question of the me
dia participating in the activities being cov
ered makes the scenario a little more sticky.
In journalism classes, students are exhort
ed to “know your sources.” Be immersed in
the scene you are trying to cover; know the
people and the community and you can
more accurately portray the events. And of
course journalists must be involved at the
scene of the event, if they are to record what
happened.
But what about when Tim Lewis walks in
the street, in the middle of a throng of pro
testers on June 18,1999, to record what the
protesters are saying and doing? He was
treated as a protester. During his trial, police
said he was interfering and breaking the law.
And what happened to the mainstream
media sources who were standing in the
street on June 18,1999, to film the standoff
between police and protesters, after the po
lice had announced that standing in the
street was against the law? The protesters
moved onto the sidewalk and the main
stream broadcast journalists stood in the
street to film. Police didn’t seem to have a
problem with it.
Because Lewis was convicted of interfer
ing with a police officer and attempted as
sault on a police officer for the incident of
June 18, ostensibly he did something more
than simply record the protesters. But who
is more accurately representing the events of
the day: a mainstream journalist filming
from behind the police lines, or the inde
pendent media filming inside the group?
Both views are important. All media pro
fessionals should try to get a glimpse of
every aspect of the scenario. And no one in
the media should interfere with police.
When they do, they become a protester, not
a journalist.
Most importantly, it isn’t the job of police
or the government to decide who has a right
to be recording events in public. If Tim
Lewis, once convicted, wants to cover a sto
ry in the future, he needs to be allowed to do
so. Just because Cascadia Alive! represents
the interests of one segment of the commu
nity doesn’t mean they should be denied ac
cess to events.
If any media outlet, mainstream or not, is
doing a poor job of representing reality or is
operating with an agenda, it’s up to con
sumers to determine if they’ll trust that in
formation. Students who follow news
events should always be questioning the
sources form which they get information.
What “sides” of the story are being told?
Whose viewpoint is being presented?
What’s being left out?
These are important questions for the
public to ask, and they can only be asked if
all types of media are allowed to be standing
in the parking lot when authorities deal with
alcohol violations.
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses can be sent to ode@ore
gon.uoregon.edu.
Our duty is not done, but
work has only just begun
A
11 right, the duty’s done.
Students cast their bal
lots. Congratulations.
Oregon voters should be
especially congratulated. Turnout
was estimated at 81 percent Tues
day evening. Fantastic job, y’all.
I don’t think, however, that the
mail-in nature of the election had
much to do with it.
According to the secretary of
state’s Web site (www.state.or.us),
Oregon’s average turnout in gener
al elections since 1960 is 75 per
cent. The trend in primary elec
tions is lower, with an average
turnout since 1960 of 56 percent,
and the turnout for the all-mail-in
primary election this May was
about the same, with 51 percent.
The all-mail-in voting didn’t make
much difference.
I still think, however, that mail
in elections are the wave of the fu
ture. We need to join the future
and encourage voter participation
like other countries do: Give peo
ple more time and opportunity to
vote. More states should give their
voters a three-week balloting peri
od and the accessibility of letting
the post office deliver the ballot.
Congratulations to Bill Bradley,
the secretary of state, for doing so
much work to make this happen
in Oregon.
But the ballots have been
mailed or dropped in the giant
green box. Politicians have been
elected and ballot measures have
been decided. And so what now?
I guess y’all are off the hook. Par -
ticipation is complete. Your voice
has been heard and you can crawl
back into the world of Fox pro
gramming, parties and sports for
another four years. Like, sooo
NOT.
Cajoling, conniving and con
vincing students to vote was just a
ploy to get them actually involved
in the political process. Your job is
not done. If Ralph Nader hasn’t
been elected, the Republicans
haven’t retained control of the U.S.
Congress and Measure 9 passed,
what do you do?
Regardless of the outcome of any
election, the real work to make our
world look more like our secret
ideal happens after the polls close.
Representatives can onlv represent
the people in the political process
if they hear what the people think.
So when you pick up the newspa
per and read that President Bush has
just approved more drilling in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, call
Giovanni Salimena Emerald
and tell him if you think it’s wrong.
If President Gore decides to push
for federal mandates of affirmative
action at every university, write him
a letter if you think it’s wrong.
If there are issues not addressed by
the elected representatives, send
them e-mail and let them know.
This is the best part: Direct par
ticipation in the governing
process can be achieved on an on
going basis on your computer. You
can find the e-mail addresses of
politicians, write a message and
send it, all in the time it takes to
download the latest U2 single.
The duty’s not done, and stu
dents aren’t off the hook. Congrat
ulations for finally getting in
volved and making your voice
heard. Now get to work.
Michael J. Kleckner is the editorial editor
for the Oregon Daily Emerald. His views do
not necessarily represent those of the
Emerald. He can be reached at
opededitor@journalist.com.