tool name

Saturday, Sep. 12, 2009

Mike Tharp: Why I did what I did

So why'd you do it?

The question asked by parents of their kids. By cops of criminals. By husbands of wives and wives of husbands.

And by a lot of you about my decision to publish -- in our newspaper and on our Web site last Saturday -- a story and photograph from The Associated Press about a young Marine dying of his wounds in Afghanistan.

To more than 50 commenters on our Web site, no answer was good enough. Nearly 100 percent of them expressed outrage over my decision. They called me unethical. Uncaring about the family of the dead Marine, who had asked the AP not to transmit the story worldwide.

They accused me of doing it to sell newspapers. They called for a boycott of the Sun-Star. They apologized to the Marine's family for the Sun-Star's action. They told McClatchy to fire me.

The issue has since gone ballistic nationwide. A debate has raged in newspapers, on TV, radio and across the blogosphere about whether the photo -- not so much the story -- should have been used by media companies all across America. Few actually did.

The Dallas Morning News ran it. Here's what managing editor George Rodrigue wrote: "Why, then, did we print it? Speaking purely for myself, it was because we owe the men and women fighting for us in Afghanistan and Iraq our full attention and understanding. Too many of us are not providing either. We are allowing them to fight, in a sense, alone. Warfare has been driven off the front page and off the TV newscasts by our economic worries or by relatively trivial fights over issues like whether President Obama should speak to schoolchildren. When unusually grim carnage makes the news, we tend to avert our eyes, perhaps telling ourselves, 'Well, they volunteered to join.' Even when we watch, much of what passes for news of the war doesn't begin to tell the real story. It doesn't fully capture the bravery and dedication of our soldiers, or the horrors endemic to any war."

I thought about running the photo again with this column. But our point was made when we published it last week. To do so again would be counterproductive. It would also needlessly antagonize those of you who took the time to register your objections.

Greg Mitchell, editor of Editor & Publisher, ran an item Wednesday on the magazine's Web site about the controversy here. "It is interesting, and vital, to look at one case study," he wrote. Sara Sandrik of Channel 30 interviewed me Thursday for KABC in Fresno.

I posted five comments online last weekend in response to the commenters' criticism. At the risk of repetition, and banking on the premise that most of our print audience doesn't read us that much online, here they are:

I expected these reactions when I ordered that both the AP photo and story be published in our pages and on this Web site. It's my responsibility, and mine alone, at the Sun-Star. I did so because, as a veteran, a war correspondent and an editor, I feel a deep duty to show American civilians the costs of fighting a war. To show the ultimate sacrifices paid by our servicemen and women in our name. Printed words, as your comments vividly show, wouldn't have generated the same responses as the image we ran.

Those of you in the Greatest Generation can recall hundreds of far more graphic images from both World War II and Korea. Those of you in my generation can do the same about iconic images from Vietnam. But since then Americans have become desensitized to the sacrifices we ask from those we send to war. Regrettably, the American press has censored itself and failed in its mission to bear witness to what war does to people -- and not just Iraqis or Afghans ... but to mostly young Americans.

As a father I also understand those of you who commented about respecting the family's wishes. I don't take those wishes lightly. But the photo and story had been transmitted all over the world by the time it landed in Merced. I believe that a greater good came from our publishing the photo than by not publishing it.

That good is to make you, our readers, aware of what I myself have seen as a soldier and as a reporter -- and this photo and story are a small part of what happens in war. Publishing the photo and story are meant to show -- not just tell -- you, our readers, what it means to go to war.

Some of you 12,000-plus veterans in our county already know that. Most of you do not. Now you know a little more. I hope that you remember this image when you make your judgments about the two wars we're in today and those in our future. If the photo serves to remind you of your duty as citizens and voters, it will have served its purpose.

For the record, the vast majority of the Sun-Star's revenue -- as with all newspapers -- comes from advertising. Not circulation. And certainly not newsstand or newspaper rack sales. If anything, our publication of the photo would lower such sales. So that old dog -- "to sell newspapers" -- won't hunt.

As to whether the Sun-Star cares about troops and their families, all you have to do is check our record -- at the bottom of this Web site. There you can find our 2007 multipart series, "The War Comes to Merced," about the ripple effects on our community from the two wars we're engaged in.

You can also find coverage of the war in Iraq by reporter Corinne Reilly and me, also under "Special Reports." We've both been there twice, and our stories and blogs in 2008-2009 speak for themselves.

Nothing I wrote satisfied the commenters. Early this week, for the first time in my life as a journalist, I didn't want to come to work. For what it's worth -- and a lot of you will say it's worth nothing -- the overwhelmingly hostile comments daunted me. They didn't make me question my decision at all -- I'd do the same again today -- but they made me wonder whether I was out of touch with you all, our readers.

I was in the kitchen and could take the heat. But I wondered whether I'd overestimated Mercedians' willingness to understand why I believe it was crucial for us, as a news organization, to publish the photo and story. I wondered whether you, our readers, could see beyond the image to the reality: that our sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters and friends are dying in faraway places.

For what?

Then I started hearing from other folks. From here, from Thailand. And from Baghdad: "We, here, have seen more than our fair share of graphic scenes, and therefore do understand that sometimes it is necessary to jar people out of their complacent existence in order for them to be better equipped to see the realities they would shy away from. It might have been a bitter draught -- but medicine almost always is."

Their messages of support rekindled my passion to come to work. To do good journalism for you, our readers.

Good journalism isn't good if it tells only what you want to know. We sometimes must tell you what you need to know. And, as happened so often in history, the first reaction was to shoot the messenger for the bad news.

As our military has become more professionalized, it has also become more distant from the civilians it protects. And you from it. Whatever you say about the draft, an army of conscripts spread and shared the truth on the ground with many more Americans than happens today.

If you hate what the family has suffered -- which is far more than the publication of a photo, the godawful loss their own flesh and blood -- then do something about it. You can act to try to stop the wars. Or if your political ideology tells you otherwise, then spend the billions to win them.

That was my point in publishing the photo. To bring you, our audience, up closer and more personally -- though still light years from combat -- and give you a hint of what's going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. To our troops -- not just their families' troops, but ours, as a nation. They belong to all of us, right?

Of all the comments, the one that meant the most to me -- even though it disagreed with my decision -- came from "elvissff:"

While I don't agree with publishing the picture, I do understand the editor's perspective. Just look at how much outrage and emotion the article has brought about just by publishing a simple picture. One wonders why the emotion is not directed toward the fact that we are still in these stupid wars, and still killing our soldiers. I sympathize tremendously with the family of the fallen soldier. And I feel it is horrendously unfair that they have to shoulder this on top of the pain of losing a son.

Connie Hodges, our newsroom executive assistant, watched her daughter Jessica deploy twice to Iraq, first when she was 19 years old. Jessica saw friends put in body bags aboard choppers in Iraq. Connie's take on publishing the photo won't sway any of you whose minds are made up. But they're worth hearing because she's been in the same place as the dying Marine's dad -- waiting for a 3 a.m. phone call that brings only sorrow and loss.

Fortunately, Jessica, now 26, came home.

And if you know Connie, you know she's a true Mercedian, through and through. She tells me and others just what's on her mind. Here's what's on her mind:

"It would be horrible to have my child seen like that -- but people need to know. People need to sit up and take notice. We can't keep sending our kids off to die for nothing. They (commenters) act like if they don't see it, it's not happening.

"They need to know what it's like. They don't want to take the responsibility. I don't see how it's wrong. It should have run. They need to realize what's happening. They just don't realize what their kids are doing over there, what they're going through. If we don't hear about it or see it, it's not happening."

So why'd you do it?

That's why I did it.

Executive Editor Mike Tharp can be reached at (209) 385-2456 or mtharp@mercedsun-star.com.