I am a journalist of 54+ years and totally agree. This is like tabloid pap. What purpose does it serve anyone? It endangers the lives of jurors and their families and just plain ignores the reason for not IDing them in the first place. People will be coming up with all kinds of excuses to not serve on a jury if this is what a so-called "journalist" thinks is proper reporting. Journalists, know your place in this event. People watch tell-all YouTube for this kind of rabble, which is just what it is. Responsible news outlets need to lead the way and show some responsibility. Shameful.
Who (or what) owns these 'news' organizations? In Iowa, our Des Moines Register no longer uses the Associated Press on orders of the Gannett family. I have noticed that much of media isn't 'liberal' even as the Conservatives would have us believe. Even handedness has gone by the wayside lately as 'yellow journalism' such as existed in the late 1800's seems to be the order of the day.
OMG! I agree, especially after what has happened before, as you pointed out. I haven't watched the news this week because I can't stand to see a certain orange face any more. I did watch Stephen Colbert last night though. He included details like that in his monologue but I just figured he was making it up for his jokes. I can't believe they were actually revealing these details. How awful! And wrong, just wrong!
You just recapped our last night’s dinner table conversation. What in the name of Roger Stone are these networks thinking? All Trump needs is ONE juror to hold out and it’s a hung jury.
The judge in the case should issue an immediate gag order against the media for revealing these details. Then immediately dismiss the current jury--for their own safety--and reseat another jury with that gag order in place. This media reporting is absolutely disgraceful. It's another reason many in the public don't trust us. Reluctantly, I have to agree with them.
Dave, I agree. What is sadly lacking these days is ethical editorial judgment. Frankly, I'm discouraged by the state of the craft these days. Thank you for your post.
Re the correction in the email version - I was hoping the juror was from Georgia. In that case the crack Trump legal team might have accepted him thinking he was from the shadow of Russia out there in the Caucasus, and not the Peach State.
I haven't been in the news biz for more than 30 years, but I can't believe we would ever have aired that kind of detail back in the day.
You've been a TV news executive. What kind of professional pressures would prompt a CNN producer and/or reporter to do this? This is s exactly why trust in media is next to nill.
Rich, I wish I knew. I assume that they assume viewers have an unquenchable thirst for every detail possible about this trial. In the absence of video and audio, they’ve decided to get creative and generate details like those reported Tuesday. As interested as I am in seeing Trump finally facing some measure of justice, I don’t want or need such revealing details about each juror, particularly if it threatens the trial’s integrity. I would never have broadcast such potentially damaging information.
I totally agree! One juror has requested to leave already because enough information was given to possibly identify her, and she was afraid for her family. What the ...? Is the primary interest in ratings over shadowing common sense now?
Mimi, I don’t think it’s about ratings. It’s more the competitive pressure to provide the best and most complete coverage to their viewers and sometimes that leads to going overboard with information. We’ll see what happens today as the trial gets underway.
Saw it too and was amazed because so much had already been said about NYC being a “small town” where people were identifiable without too many clues. Thanks for underlining this violation of ethics.
I am a journalist of 54+ years and totally agree. This is like tabloid pap. What purpose does it serve anyone? It endangers the lives of jurors and their families and just plain ignores the reason for not IDing them in the first place. People will be coming up with all kinds of excuses to not serve on a jury if this is what a so-called "journalist" thinks is proper reporting. Journalists, know your place in this event. People watch tell-all YouTube for this kind of rabble, which is just what it is. Responsible news outlets need to lead the way and show some responsibility. Shameful.
Who (or what) owns these 'news' organizations? In Iowa, our Des Moines Register no longer uses the Associated Press on orders of the Gannett family. I have noticed that much of media isn't 'liberal' even as the Conservatives would have us believe. Even handedness has gone by the wayside lately as 'yellow journalism' such as existed in the late 1800's seems to be the order of the day.
I really enjoy your insights. But is the juror formally from Oregon or Georgia?😁
Clark, the one I referenced reportedly is originally from Oregon. Why do you ask?
Whoops, I see it now. The second reference. I’ll fix it on the web version. Thanks!
OMG! I agree, especially after what has happened before, as you pointed out. I haven't watched the news this week because I can't stand to see a certain orange face any more. I did watch Stephen Colbert last night though. He included details like that in his monologue but I just figured he was making it up for his jokes. I can't believe they were actually revealing these details. How awful! And wrong, just wrong!
Colbert is my nightly therapy.
Always a day late as 10:30 is outside the legal limits for an octogenarian.
It holds until the next day, but his monologues don’t work in reruns.
It was my husbands as well
Great column.
You just recapped our last night’s dinner table conversation. What in the name of Roger Stone are these networks thinking? All Trump needs is ONE juror to hold out and it’s a hung jury.
As always, you hit the nail on the head. I wish you were teaching journalism at every college in the country. Can we figure out a way to clone you?
Until then, I’m so grateful that we still have your voice in this column! Thank you!
Terri, you’re too kind.
The judge in the case should issue an immediate gag order against the media for revealing these details. Then immediately dismiss the current jury--for their own safety--and reseat another jury with that gag order in place. This media reporting is absolutely disgraceful. It's another reason many in the public don't trust us. Reluctantly, I have to agree with them.
Just because the media CAN report something, it doesn’t mean they necessarily should.
Dave, I agree. What is sadly lacking these days is ethical editorial judgment. Frankly, I'm discouraged by the state of the craft these days. Thank you for your post.
I had the same reaction. Shut up. JAS
Spot on👍. Thanks centering this Dave. And this was CNN - not FOX!!
Grateful for our Iowa laws on jury privacy. (And I am needing some positivity regarding Iowa laws ☹️)
Agree!
Re the correction in the email version - I was hoping the juror was from Georgia. In that case the crack Trump legal team might have accepted him thinking he was from the shadow of Russia out there in the Caucasus, and not the Peach State.
Sorry, Mark. My bad. It’s fixed now in the online version. Fingers got ahead of my brain.
Way to go Dave. This seems to me to come fairly close to jury intimidation or tampering, And I'm sorry, it's jury selection, not The Dating Game.
Exactly. And the judge is not Jim Lange!
Dave, the report you cited is appalling.
I haven't been in the news biz for more than 30 years, but I can't believe we would ever have aired that kind of detail back in the day.
You've been a TV news executive. What kind of professional pressures would prompt a CNN producer and/or reporter to do this? This is s exactly why trust in media is next to nill.
Rich, I wish I knew. I assume that they assume viewers have an unquenchable thirst for every detail possible about this trial. In the absence of video and audio, they’ve decided to get creative and generate details like those reported Tuesday. As interested as I am in seeing Trump finally facing some measure of justice, I don’t want or need such revealing details about each juror, particularly if it threatens the trial’s integrity. I would never have broadcast such potentially damaging information.
The number of alternates should be larger. I fear/imagine several jurors will become ill once the trolling and harassment sinks in.
I totally agree! One juror has requested to leave already because enough information was given to possibly identify her, and she was afraid for her family. What the ...? Is the primary interest in ratings over shadowing common sense now?
Mimi, I don’t think it’s about ratings. It’s more the competitive pressure to provide the best and most complete coverage to their viewers and sometimes that leads to going overboard with information. We’ll see what happens today as the trial gets underway.
Saw it too and was amazed because so much had already been said about NYC being a “small town” where people were identifiable without too many clues. Thanks for underlining this violation of ethics.