Thinkings...
So I've been lurking around Romenesko keeping track of the incident involving former Miami city commissioner Art Teele committing suicide in the building of the Miami Herald. In the aftermath of tracing the steps of everything went on, the columnist that Teele called before shooting himself, Jim DeFede, admitted he started tape-recording the conversation. This potentially being a violation of Florida law, the Herald immediatly fired him.
This has been a lot easier for me to keep track of than any other ethical incident since Eric Slater at the L.A. Times since 1) I'm not investigating it for a newspaper and 2) I had already done the incredibly annoying (yet free!) registration process that papers are doing for the Miami Herald a while back, before Dave Barry went on sabbatical.
So, here's the whole deal.
According to Florida law, it's illegal to tape a phone call unless both parties agree to having the conversation taped. Not doing so is a felony.
But, there are exemptions. For a first offense, without illegal intent and not for commercial gain, would be a misdemeanor. Using business telephones is not illegal, period.
This is less strict than the law here in California, where those exceptions don't exist.
So, here's the questions I have on this part: First, as a journalist, it would seem DeFede would be well aware of the recording laws in Florida. Would you then be able to prove there was not illegal intent, if the person's job pretty much requires him to know the legality, no matter how much of a pressure cooker the situation might be? Second (and this is just because I'm occasionally technologically and legalese slow-witted), by "business telephone" does that mean a recorder built into the telephone itself, or that the conversation is being recorded from a business phone line? That issue would factor in on DeFede talking to Teele from a Herald telephone.
The next issue is the paper's reaction. Even if DeFede could be charged with a felony, was it right of the Herald for such an immediate termination? Was it worthwhile for Knight Ridder, which owns the Herald, to suspend DeFede and fully investigate? That's a personal judgement call. As one who is a future journalist, I would personally feel more comfortable if my employer were willing to investigate my side before giving me the ax. If it were to come I had done wrong, then fine, fire me. But at least be fair-minded about it. As someone who has the seen the destructive capability of sloppy reporting and potential fabrication firsthand, those are a lot more damaging to a newspaper's reputation (and profit line) than hitting a record button.
On a side note, having just completed the ethics course at Chico State, what about the Herald running photos of Teele on the ground with a pool of blood coming out of his head? Such a photo really adds to the impact of the story, but it is too squeamish?
I say the initial photo the Hearld posted, taken from headfirst on Teele, probably was. The focus was not on the person, but the blood. A different photo, showing police looking over Teele's body and taken from his feet, still shows some blood, but puts the focus on Teele's body, is a better picture.
This has been a lot easier for me to keep track of than any other ethical incident since Eric Slater at the L.A. Times since 1) I'm not investigating it for a newspaper and 2) I had already done the incredibly annoying (yet free!) registration process that papers are doing for the Miami Herald a while back, before Dave Barry went on sabbatical.
So, here's the whole deal.
According to Florida law, it's illegal to tape a phone call unless both parties agree to having the conversation taped. Not doing so is a felony.
But, there are exemptions. For a first offense, without illegal intent and not for commercial gain, would be a misdemeanor. Using business telephones is not illegal, period.
This is less strict than the law here in California, where those exceptions don't exist.
So, here's the questions I have on this part: First, as a journalist, it would seem DeFede would be well aware of the recording laws in Florida. Would you then be able to prove there was not illegal intent, if the person's job pretty much requires him to know the legality, no matter how much of a pressure cooker the situation might be? Second (and this is just because I'm occasionally technologically and legalese slow-witted), by "business telephone" does that mean a recorder built into the telephone itself, or that the conversation is being recorded from a business phone line? That issue would factor in on DeFede talking to Teele from a Herald telephone.
The next issue is the paper's reaction. Even if DeFede could be charged with a felony, was it right of the Herald for such an immediate termination? Was it worthwhile for Knight Ridder, which owns the Herald, to suspend DeFede and fully investigate? That's a personal judgement call. As one who is a future journalist, I would personally feel more comfortable if my employer were willing to investigate my side before giving me the ax. If it were to come I had done wrong, then fine, fire me. But at least be fair-minded about it. As someone who has the seen the destructive capability of sloppy reporting and potential fabrication firsthand, those are a lot more damaging to a newspaper's reputation (and profit line) than hitting a record button.
On a side note, having just completed the ethics course at Chico State, what about the Herald running photos of Teele on the ground with a pool of blood coming out of his head? Such a photo really adds to the impact of the story, but it is too squeamish?
I say the initial photo the Hearld posted, taken from headfirst on Teele, probably was. The focus was not on the person, but the blood. A different photo, showing police looking over Teele's body and taken from his feet, still shows some blood, but puts the focus on Teele's body, is a better picture.
Robert said this @ 12:45:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home