tool name

Saturday, Oct. 17, 2009

Tom Frazier: Good for the goose and gander?

Transparency is a popular buzzword these days. But do we always really want to know?

Sun-Star editorials, stories and columns, including the Sun Dog, have insisted that local governmental activities be transparent.

Merced County has been a frequent target of our pens -- because of an obvious media-unfriendly policy. The county has a centralized policy that places muzzles on most of its staff.

That brings up the question, "Is what's good for the goose also good for the gander?" Should the Sun-Star itself adopt a more transparent modus operandi?

Traditionally, newspapers report the five W's -- who, what, when, where and why. But there is a movement to add a second "why" -- why the paper elected to print a particular story.

Recently, Executive Editor Mike Tharp wrote a column explaining why he elected to run a story, the one about Lance Cpl. Joshua Bernard, a Marine killed in Afghanistan. His explanation ignited a huge bonfire of comments. Most were unfavorable.

So the question becomes, is it better to say, "Our work speaks for itself" as newspapers have done for decades? Or is it better to add transparency by explaining why journalistic decisions are made?

I must admit that I'm vacillating on this issue -- and can attack or defend either point of view.

It's complex on several levels. Some parts of journalism demand secrecy; others should be as open as a pet dog wagging its tail.

Investigative reporting is an example of the former. Watergate had to be totally clandestine -- otherwise, the public would never have learned about the devious behavior in the Nixon era.

Another example, from back in the "old days," is the secrecy dictated by competition. When we had numerous news outlets in a geographical area, each newspaper would try to be the first to print a particular story.

When is the last time you heard the word "scoop" used in that context?

The question thus becomes, "Should the Sun-Star tell us everything?" Do we really want to know?

Let's explore some other possibilities. Should magicians tell us exactly how an illusion is done? Would we like their performance more if we knew? Or would it ruin it?

If the scripts for the TV shows "House" or "Flash Forward" were pre-released, would you still watch them?

What would a good game of poker be like if all cards were dealt face-up?

When I first started writing the Sun Dog column, I asked to visit the newsroom during the critical deadline period. Executive Editor Mike Tharp told me to come in, but cautioned me that watching the making of the sausage may spoil the tasting.

It wasn't that bad.

I could agree that much of the newsroom should have a Harry Potter invisibility cloak, but only up to a point. Reporters shouldn't disclose sources or what they are working on, but they shouldn't be invisible either.

Sun Dog suggests that each reporter should get out and about -- visiting service clubs and the like. Readers will develop a better rapport with the paper when they realize reporters are real live people.

A former freelancer enlisted the Sun Dog to make policies of the paper totally transparent. He asked specific questions about one particular policy, "Why was the policy implemented, when was the policy started and what purpose does the policy serve?" He asked for a written version.

As it turns out, there was no written policy. Instead, it was a plain ol' business decision.

That's an animal with different stripes, neither a goose nor a gander.

Unlike government agencies, businesses need to adapt and react, much like an audible in a football team's huddle. That's the flexibility they need to stay in business -- for the long term.

Just like a parent telling a child sometimes, "Because I said so" is reason enough.

Tom Frazier writes Sun Dog and can be reached at sundog@promessage.com.