A look at Dohn and journalistic ethics

by gilbert on Dec 28, 2007 1:20 PM PST Comment 7 comments

Brian Dohn has annoyed me before, but never as much as today, when he wrote: (emphasis mine)

I always thought DeWayne Walker should be the guy because he is bright, he loves to compete, he relates well to the players and he has a son their age, he wants to be in SoCal, he understands the intricacies involved in recruiting to UCLA and he has proven he can hire a very good defensive staff, because he's done that. And he has a great personality to give sound bites and make people feel interested during an interview.

Sure, every sports reporter has sources they go to for good quotes, but that doesn't mean those sources are more qualified for certain jobs.

Since I was ticked off and Menelaus mentioned me by name in the intro of his post, I decided to analyze Dohn's journalistic ethics by using the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics (the SPJ is highly regarded among many journalists). I read Dohn regularly, but not as closely as many of you on here, so feel free to point out specific cases where Dohn's journalism ethics have been questionable.

I'm going to blockquote parts of the Code of Ethics, then put my thoughts below them.

-Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.

Naming a coach you'd prefer is a huge conflict of interest, no matter who it is, when you're a beat writer for a team and covering the coaching search story. That's obvious.

- Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable

He clearly didn't do that with Dorrell.

- Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
- Always question sources' motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.

Obviously, reporters need to use anonymous sources sometimes to report news. But Dohn seems to do this more than the other UCLA reporters.

- Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

Dohn seems to mix commentary and reporting on his blog. Most readers should be able to tell the difference, but some won't.

It wasn't that long ago that I thought very highly of Dohn. But Dohn fell victim to something that happens to many writers who cover one team for a long time. They become friends with the coaches, players and other people in the program, and form an emotional attachment to them which kills objectivity.

Full disclosure: I'm guilty of this too. I was Gary Adams' biggest fan at UCLA, and never wanted to see him retire. Then I covered the baseball team last year and realized how wrong I was. I still say Adams is one of the best human beings I have ever met, but he wasn't as good at winning baseball games as he should've been. Sometimes, you learn the hard way. But you would think a professional reporter should've learned that by now.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Outstanding Work, Gilbert

I wonder if Dohn feels free to be less professional because much of his garbage is strewn on a blog, and not in print.

But, I suspect that the Code of Ethics does not draw that distinction or allow that sloppiness.

I find Dohn's most egregious violations to be in his misuse of unnamed "sources". As we've pointed out here before, this is not "deep throat" and I wonder why he cannot either name the source or explain why it is reliable. And, as with Deep Throat, most publishers require that reporters who use unattributed sources have at least 2 such sources for each fact reported. I often get the feeling that Dohn's columns or blog are written by the subjects themselves, or their PR rep's -- and I'm sure there is another Code violation if that is true.

Most codes of conduct, such as the one we lawyers must follow, regulate our acts in all spheres, not just some tribunals.

Gilbert, are there sanctions for violations?

Thanks for the post.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 28, 2007 1:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

No sanctions from SPJ

The SPJ isn't a governing body and can't sanction Dohn in anyway. They can publically speak up condemning his actions, but usually groups like the SPJ only speak up about major issues -- sadly, there's much worse than this out there.

Dohn's editors, however, can do whatever they want to him. They can hold him to a higher standard or a low standard of ethics.

And 66, you're right about the 2 sources rule, which is universally accepted at all levels of media, from the big guys like ESPN and the NY Times to college papers like the Daily Bruin. I also wonder if Dohn has two sources on some of these things or just one guy telling him things.

by gilbert on Dec 28, 2007 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and about blogging

The code of ethics doesn't distinguish between any form of media, blogs, writing, photos, Internet, TV, radio, etc.

by gilbert on Dec 28, 2007 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

2 Sources Rule

I had to live with it when making documentary films.

A group with which I was working on a documentary stumbled upon the "Contra/Cocaine" connection. We had a pilot who claimed that he flew guns to the Contras, they loaded coke onto the plane, and he flew to a US base where it was unloaded -- all under the protection of the CIA.

We could not find a second source and could not use that segment.

Later, the story came out, well sourced and substantiated.

We were so close but couldn't pull a Dohn "a source told us today that the CIA was involved with the drug trade".

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 28, 2007 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Regulations and guidelines

Journalists aren't governed by the society, but they are governed by their legal staffs. Sloppy journalism often leads to litigation wherein loss of revenue is much less painful than loss of credibility (and, traditionally, loss of advertisers - though Fox News proves this extrapolation is no longer necessarily true).

Certainly, blogs have changed the landscape for journalists and other writers. So much information is disseminated without any proper vetting; that dissemination being made with the tacit understanding that the writer is only offering an opinion or observation. IMO, blogs are a two-edged sword: on the one hand they provide an opportunity for the reader to gain information that might not be readily available via the MSM; on the other hand, much misinformation is shared and, as we all know, the more often that misinformation is trumpeted, the more likely that misinformation is going to be accepted as truth. Witness the efforts of DWW's brother whose ridiculous comments are being embraced by some many readers.

I suspect there is some duplicity on Dohn's part. The latest report I've read, that Dohn authored, came under the Press-Telegram's banner. I'm not aware of any relationship between the Daily News and the P-T (please inform me if there is), but between those two papers and his blog, Dohn can mix and match whatever information he pleases. My question is, what is the real motivation for his public shilling for DWW? Does it fall under the heading of Making and Keeping Famous and Influential Friends? Dohn wouldn't be the first writer to weave his reportage in such a way as to please a subject, even at the expense of his journalistic credibility.

What's sad in all of this (besides Dohn's complicity in the attempted marketing of DWW) is that his writing is emblematic of the decline of journalistic excellence: blase´ reportage, vanilla content, observations steeped in innuendo or half-truths; the mini-pyramid paragraph paradigm of USA Today.

Man, I miss Mal Florence. I REALLY miss Jim Murray.

UCLA - the finest public university in the world

by SecondGenBruin on Dec 28, 2007 4:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs