Note: The extracts in italics and in square brackets are parts of the original article, but they are not to be found in the “North Star” book.
Text 1: Peeping Tom Journalism (by Nancy Day – from “Sensational TV – Trash or Journalism”)
(1)Reporters constantly struggle with what and how much to tell. Sometimes the facts are clear. Other times, journalists must (1) rely on their own judgement.
(2)A retired minister in a small town does not return from a fishing trip. Police find his car parked about halfway to the lake. It is locked and undamaged. In it they find a half-eaten ham sandwich, fishing tackle, a gun with one shell fired, and a copy of “Penthouse”. The minister is missing. You’re the reporter and your story is due.
(3)What do you report? Suppose the minister just went for a walk? Do you risk embarrassment and mention the magazine? Is the gun important? Should you propose any theories about what might have happened?
(4)The reporter who actually (2) faced these decisions decided to mention the gun, the sandwich, the fishing tackle, and the condition of the car, but not the magazine or any speculation. The minister’s body was later found. He has been killed by a hitchhiker, who had left the magazine in the minister’s car.
(5)In the old days reporters knew politicians (including presidents) who slept around, movie stars who were gay, and public figures who used drugs or (3) abused alcohol. They just (4) kept it to themselves. Now, at least in part because the public seems (5) to have an endless hunger for it, reporters sometimes cover these aspects of celebrities’ lives more than any other.
(6)Some of the interest can be justified on the basis that character affects how people perform their jobs. But what if the information isn’t (6) relevant? For example, does the public need to know that a senator is gay? When a famous person dies, does the public have a right to all the details? Should the public know which public figures are unfaithful to their spouses? Are these things we need to know or just things we want to know?
(7)When Gennifer Flowers (7) alleged a twelve-year affair with President Bill Clinton, she first sold the story and so did the networks and the major newspapers and news magazines. Peter Jennings, anchor for ABC’s “World News Tonight”, was against broadcasting the Flowers story without further reporting by ABC correspondents, but says, “it was made clear to (me) ... that if you didn’t go with the story, every (ABC) affiliate in the country would look up and say, “What the hell’s going on in this place? Don’t they know a story when they see it?”
|
|
|
(8)Some stories receive such wide visibility that to ignore them is to (8) “play ostrich man”, says Shelby Coffey, editor of the Los Angeles Times. “You have to give your readers some (9) perspective on the information they are getting.”
(9)(10) Scrutiny may be the price one (11) pays for fame. But what about relatives of celebrities? Are they (12) fair game too? And what about the average person?
(10)When Sara Jane Moore pointed a gun at President Ford, a man in the crowd knocked her hand, deflecting the shot. The man, Oliver W. Sipple, became an instant hero. He was thirty-three years old and a Marine veteran. What else did the public want or need to know about him? Initial reports did not mention Sipple’s sexual orientation. But when a San Francisco (13) news columnist said that local gay leaders were proud of Sipple’s actions, other papers began to report it. Sipple (14) sued the columnist and several newspapers for (15) invading his privacy. He said that he suffered “great (16) mental anguish, embarrassment, and humiliation”. Lawyers argued that by becoming involved in an event of worldwide importance, Sipple had given up his (16) right to privacy because the public has a legitimate interest in his activity.
(11)Rosa Lopez was a maid working quietly and anonymously until she became a (17) key witness in the O/J? Simpson trial. Suddenly, she was the (18) focus of intense scrutiny. Lopez was (19) hounded by cameras and reporters everywhere she went. Her every move was analyzed. She eventually returned to her native country to escape the pressure, only to find that the media followed her there.
(12)How many witnesses will come forward in the future, knowing what kind of treatment awaits them? Do people who accidentally find themselves involved in such (20) high-profile cases have rights, or do we deserve to know everything about them?
Text 2: Focus on Bomb Suspect Brings Tears and a Plea (By RICK BRAGG (Published: August 27, 1996; New York Times)
(1)Barbara Jewell stared into the (1) unblinking eyes of the television cameras she has come to despise and spoke in tears today of how life had changed for her son, Richard, since he was named a month ago as a (2) suspect in the bombing in Centennial Olympic Park. "Now my son has no real life,'' said Mrs. Jewell, a little gray-haired woman, speaking out for the first time since her 33-year-old son was suspected -- but never arrested or (3) charged -- in the bombing that killed one person and injured 111 others.
|
|
|
(2)''He is a prisoner in my home,'' Mrs. Jewell said at a news conference this afternoon. ''He cannot work. He cannot know any type of normal life. He can only sit and wait for this nightmare to end.''
(3)She begged President Clinton to (4) clear her son's name and asked the reporters to spread the (5) word that her son was innocent of any (6) wrongdoing in the July 27 bombing. After her tearful request, her son's lawyers said they would (7) file civil lawsuits over reporting on the case.
(4)Richard A. Jewell, a security guard in Centennial Olympic Park and a former sheriff's deputy, was at first hailed as a hero for discovering the bomb and helping to clear people from the area. Then (8) news accounts, including a special edition of The Atlanta Journal, named him as a suspect. Since then, television and newspaper executives have repeatedly debated the intense attention focused on Mr. Jewell, with most deciding that too many people knew he was a suspect for his name to be avoided or suppressed.
(5)''Last week, a close family friend of 29 years took seriously ill,'' Mrs. Jewell said. ''While he was on his (9) deathbed, because Richard did not want to (10) subject him to the world attention of the media, he did not go see him. Richard was not able to see his friend before he died.'' Her son did go to the funeral home after his friend died, she said.''When we returned from the funeral home, for the first time I saw my son sobbing,'' Mrs. Jewell said, breaking into tears herself as she recounted the story. ''He said, 'Mama, everybody was looking.'
(6)''I do not think any of you can even begin to imagine what our lives are like.'' [Precisely how her son became the focus of the investigation is still unclear. Mr. Jewell's lawyers said they were continuing efforts to unseal the search warrant that allowed the F.B.I. to search his mother's house, his pickup and a cabin where he lived before moving in with his mother. It would explain how Mr. Jewell became a suspect. The F.B.I. has declined to disclose what evidence, if any, it has against him.] ''Richard is not a murderer,'' said Mrs. Jewell, an insurance claims coordinator. But, she said, ''he has been convicted in the (11) court of public opinion.''
|
|
|
(7)Meanwhile, the Jewells continue to be besieged by reporters. ''They have taken all privacy from us,'' Mrs. Jewell said. ''They have taken all peace. They have rented an apartment which faces my home in order to keep their cameras trained upon us (12) around the clock. They watch and photograph everything we do. We wake up to photographers, we go to sleep with photographers. We cannot look out the windows. We cannot walk our dogs without being followed down the sidewalk”.
[Lawyers for her son said their questions to the F.B.I., about where the investigation stands and how long this will continue for the Jewells, had gone unanswered. ''We're four weeks beyond their search of his home, his automobile, his cabin where he once lived,'' said one lawyer, Lin Wood. ''This is not the Olympic park bomber. Richard Jewell is an innocent man, and he is a victim of some very, very cruel circumstances.'' Mrs. Jewell said she and her son had to have some peace. ''I am asking the President for help,'' Mrs. Jewell said. ''As the head of the Justice Department and the F.B.I., he has a moral duty to the citizens of this country. If the F.B.I. does not intend to charge my son, please tell us. Please tell the world.''She finished the press conference in tears and finally had to stop. She said she could not answer questions.
''I am so very drained,'' she said. ''I hope and pray to God that this never happens to anybody else.''
Although Mr. Jewell still remained in the background of the push to clear his name, the news conference was a solid sign that Mr. Jewell's lawyers were taking the offensive in an unusual case that has raised substantial questions about the naming of a suspect before an arrest is made or formal charges are filed.
|
|
|
That will almost certainly result in civil lawsuits, his lawyers said. ''We obviously have some very real concerns in terms of looking closely at how this story was reported by The Atlanta Journal,'' Mr. Wood said. ''We have some concerns about how certain members of the television media commented upon this story. At some point in the near future, some appropriate legal action will be instituted on behalf of Mr. Jewell in a civil proceeding.''
Mr. Jewell's lawyers said The Journal's initial report had included false allegations. Other reports characterized Mr. Jewell as fitting the psychological and behavioral profile of someone likely to commit such a crime. ''Richard was portrayed, as a matter of fact, as fitting a profile,'' Mr. Wood said. ''He does not factually fit that profile.''
An issue in any libel suit would be whether Mr. Jewell sought attention for his role as a hero in the bombing, making him a public figure and, thus, less likely to win such a suit. Mr. Wood said, ''Richard Jewell, to our knowledge and from our investigation, at no time initiated any contact with the news media.'' Instead, AT&T, which had contracted with the security firm that employed Mr. Jewell, sought that attention, his lawyers said.
Mr. Jewell spoke to several television reporters about his role in finding the bomb.]
(8) Mrs. Jewell said she was not just saddened and hurt by (12) the ordeal, but was also angry [, and not only at the media. The F.B.I. invaded her privacy, she said, searching through everything, including her Tupperware and ''my undergarments.']
Note: The extracts in italics and in square brackets are parts of the original article, but they are not to be found in the “North Star” book.
Дата добавления: 2019-11-16; просмотров: 785; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!