Tragedy no place for insensitivity or sensationalism

Published on Monday 2 April 2007 00:47

THE popular perception of journalists is that they are all heartless reptiles who would sell their own grandmothers to get the story. The cut-throat competitiveness of the industry and the constant contact with tragedy inure us to normal human feelings and mean that we are emotional cripples not suited for polite society, but destined to languish in the fourth estate.

In my experience, the opposite is true. The job does mean that we do have to deal with people who have suffered great tragedy in their life, and we come along usually at exactly the worst time, when every feeling is still raw. There are some parts of the job that are not pleasant, but which have to be approached professionally. We insist upon very strict standards for dealing with people sensitively and compassionately. My experience is that the vast majority of journalists who have come through the traditional news reporter route have had to speak to a lot of people at very difficult times, are actually extremely aware of people's feelings and situations and will be very thoughtful and careful in their dealings. It is impossible not to be moved in these situations and I think that the empathy accumulates with experience. Nobody wants to add through insensitivity to the pain of people already suffering.

So any complaint that we have sensationalised a tragedy is bound to be viewed extremely seriously and will be examined particularly closely.

A letter from a reader states: "I write, again, to complain about a front-page article inaccurately, and unnecessarily, sensationalising another tragedy."

The letter concerns the deaths of Peter Wilson and Jim Ross who perished while cross-country skiing in Norway. Peter's father, Rupert, survived.

The letter states: "The second paragraph on the front page describes 'the pleasant, 26km, downhill journey from Kjeldebu to Finse'.

"My map shows Kjeldebu to be at an altitude of 1,102 metres. The marked track to Finse climbs over the south-eastern flank of the Hardangerjokulen to a height of approximately 1,350 metres between Helvetesnutane and Helveteshorgi before descending towards Finse.

"In good weather that trip in either direction is a challenging excursion. In bad weather with wind and poor visibility it is, indeed, a very serious expedition.

"I write because I find your attempts to sensationalise such incidents unworthy of a quality newspaper. Your poor choice of words on the front page and inaccurate detail all subtract from what, otherwise, was a well presented article on this tragedy."

Sensationalism is very subjective, but in any tragedy we will want to err far on the side of caution. But the reality is that tragedy usually occurs in dramatic circumstances and is always very emotive. Again, there is a balance to be struck, but we will always try to be mindful of the feelings of those who have lost a loved one.

In this report, we perhaps were inaccurate, and that is wrong and obviously something to be avoided. Inaccuracy in reports of tragedies can be very distressing so even greater care than usual is required. In this case, it is to be hoped that the inaccuracy about the route did not add greatly to the distress.

But did that inaccuracy sensationalise our report? Did we deliberately set out to cause excitement or shock, as the dictionary defines sensationalism?

I would be very unhappy if I thought that we had. Any attempts to do so would indeed be unworthy of a quality newspaper. In this case, the offending words were in the body of the text, not in the headline or in the sub-deck, or a highlighted quote. I do not think there was any attempt to deliberately shock. I do not think we sensationalised.

Forgive me if I have gone on at length on this very sensitive issue, but as I said this is something we treat very seriously, and rightly so.

WE HAVE descended to the level of football commentators and managers, according to one angry reader. That's a long way down.

Abysmal, was what Mr Cramond, of Edinburgh, thought of our decision to run a front-page taster story that Scotland were hoping for a result in Italy.

"Of course they will get a result, what you mean is a good result," said Mr Cramond, leaving me in no doubt that he believes Scotland's national newspaper should be above such slang and modern idiomatic usage.

No credit to the lads then. We didn't done good.