On concessions, Stacey Abrams and President Trump are not the same

Sometimes you can get the facts right, but still distort the truth [View this email online]( [NPR Public Editor by Poynter's Kelly McBride]( Happy official holiday season. This growing community of journalism ethics fans does not seem to be taking any breaks from analyzing NPR’s work. We’re glad you’re here. This week, our inbox was flooded with emails objecting to [a story]( that compares President Donald Trump’s refusal to accept the election outcome in Georgia to 2018 Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams’ refusal to concede her loss to Brian Kemp. As many of you have pointed out, these are not the same things. At all. Abrams was objecting to unfair election procedures and policies that disenfranchised thousands of voters, a process that was supervised by her opponent, who was the Secretary of State overseeing the election at the time. And since then, many of those flawed processes have been fixed, thanks in part to her advocacy. Abrams was not trying to deny the outcome. In fact, at the time she said, “I acknowledge … Kemp will be certified as the victor.” The story itself explains the difference between Trump’s and Abrams’ positions. But the headline makes it seem as if there is a reasonable comparison to be made. And, yes, lots of Trump supporters were making that argument on social media, but that doesn’t mean it’s valid. It would have been better if the headline pointed out that what Abrams did in 2018 was radically different from Trump’s actions in 2020. NPR listeners were eloquent in their critiques. Donald Round called the story “egregious,” adding that “a rather large segment of our society are hopelessly misguided & misinformed.” And Linda Luz said the story “seems to miss the whole point of voter suppression.” It’s an example of a story where the facts are accurate, but the premise is a distortion. But you know what’s great? NPR listeners spot flaws like that and they expect so much more from public radio. In fact, it’s rare that NPR makes factual mistakes in its reporting. But getting the exact right nuance into a story requires more than just getting the facts right. We’ve got two more critiques where the reporting was accurate, but listeners wanted it to be even more accurate. In a weird way, the fact that we can expect so much is a credit to NPR’s overall excellence. [Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams left the stage after addressing supporters during an election night watch party in 2018]( Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams left the stage after addressing supporters during an election night watch party in 2018. John Amis/AP From the Inbox Here are a few quotes from the Public Editor's inbox that resonated with us. You can share your questions and concerns with us through the [NPR Contact page](. Immigration confusion William Foster writes: I hate to dredge up the stale and age-old issue of how illegal immigration to the U.S. is termed, but this is a case where the exclusion of any distinction between legal and illegal immigration has created a terrible possibility of confusion and misinformation. In Joel Rose's "[For Immigrants, Election Promises Relief From An 'Atmosphere Of Terror]( report, illegal immigrants are referred to, over and over, as simply "immigrants". From the very title through to the end, no reference is made to the fact that the "terror," deportations, and the like are entirely an issue with illegal, and not legal immigrants. Indeed, the only time that's made the slightest bit clear is through a quote in the penultimate paragraph. To be clear: this is no academic or political debate — the fact is that one could listen to Mr. Rose's entire story and come away thinking that the U.S. and local governments are "terrorizing" legal immigrants, be they permanent residents, holders of green cards or H-1B visas, etc. Surely this was an oversight? The most recent NPR article I can find detailing your policy is from 2019, and makes it clear that the term "illegal immigrant" is preferred — and I cannot believe that NPR has altered it to deliberately remove any distinction between legal and illegal immigrants to the U.S. There are three important issues here. 1) Using precise and narrow descriptions when appropriate rather than broad terms. 2) Finding the words that confer dignity and humanity, rather than reduce people to their legal status alone. 3) Telling the story in a clear and concise way that will have an impact on the audience. To avoid confusion, this story by NPR Correspondent Joel Rose could have made it clear that while only immigrants here without documentation risk deportation after minor traffic stops, that threat of deportation impacts the broader immigrant community. (If you read the story on NPR’s website, the distinction is in the second sentence: “Thousands of immigrants in the country illegally have been deported for minor offenses, advocates say, because of close ties between county jails and immigration authorities.” But if you listened to the audio version of the story, you hear four references to immigrants or immigrant communities before the focus is narrowed. On the fifth reference, one minute in, Rose explains that “thousands of immigrants in the country illegally have been deported this way.” This story is not just about immigrants without documentation, NPR News Deputy National Editor Laura Smitherman told me. “It’s not just immigrants in the country illegally who are impacted by deportations, but their communities as well,” she said. “Many undocumented immigrants have family members here, often in mixed-status households. Moreover, immigrants in the country legally don’t face deportation; it’s those in the country illegally — as the stories online and on air both clearly state.” She added, “We don’t label people by referring to them as ‘illegals’ or ‘illegal immigrants’ but rather say they are in the country illegally.” That point — about the impact on immigrants here illegally and their communities — is not explicit, but is alluded to by one source Rose interviewed, who said: “This has been a long journey with a lot of suffering and family separations as well.” NPR’s usage complies with the guidance offered by The National Association of Hispanic Journalists in its [cultural competence handbook](. According to the suggestions, “a person’s legal status could change because of a variety of other factors, and the use of the word ‘illegal’ obscures this complexity. Moreover, it should be noted that people accused of other misdemeanors are not referred to as ‘illegal’ in any context.” Julio-César Chávez, NAHJ vice president of broadcast, told me in an email that it’s his understanding that the story is about undocumented immigrants. “As a writer it's boring to have to add clarification every single time, but for the sake of clarity I think it would have been a good idea to mention illegal presence once or twice in the middle of the report,” he wrote. “I do think it should be clarified throughout the four minute report.” As you mentioned, former NPR Public Editor Elizabeth Jensen [touched on this topic last year](. She cited Standards & Practices Editor Mark Memmott: “When we're reporting about the people at the center of this story, it's still best practice to begin with action words, rather than labels. Two examples: They are ‘in the country illegally’ or have ‘entered the country illegally,’ ” Memmott’s guidance read, in part. So back to the three ethics issues: This story hits the mark on two, and is only a slight miss on the third. While it’s true that only immigrants who are here without documents can be deported, the lingering threat impacts more than just those individuals. — Amaris Castillo Nuclear scientist or nuclear weapons scientist? B. Klein writes: [There's a not so subtle reluctance]( to not identify associated Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, as a/the key figure in the country's nuclear WEAPONS program. Wrong in the lede and in the station promo copy to identify him as 'nuclear scientist' if he was the head 'nuclear weapons scientist'. (I don't think it's in dispute and it's crucial to the story.) In the story that you reference, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh is first identified by the host as “Iran’s top nuclear scientist” and then by the correspondent as “the Iranian scientist.” Immediately after that, the correspondent says, “Israel describes him as the head of Iran's secret efforts to develop a nuclear weapon. Many believe this program has been restricted or suspended for many years.” As a consumer, you hear that Fakhrizadeh is connected to nuclear weapons, but it’s not immediately clear that Fakhrizadeh was the lead architect of Iran’s effort to develop nuclear weapons. This [conversation]( with an Iranian historian had similar flaws. But others made the connection, including [this two-way]( and [this conversation]( with a fellow from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. No NPR story on this killing used the word “weapons” in a headline. And in most of the stories, Fakhrizadeh’s connection to Iran’s nuclear weapons program comes after he is identified as a scientist. What’s the most relevant fact? After the fact that he was killed in his own country, his role developing nuclear weapons is critical. While it’s crucial that the sourcing on Fakhrizadeh’s connection to the weapons program be solid, that sourcing is [out there](. His work on the weapons program is directly related to his death and to Iran’s response to his death. Since most of us are not well-versed in Iran’s history, we need the news report to elevate critical facts if we want to gain true understanding. — Kelly McBride Spotlight on The Public Editor spends a lot of time examining moments where NPR fell short. Yet we also learn a lot about NPR by looking at work that we find to be compelling and excellent journalism. Here we share a line or two about the pieces where NPR shines. Anxiety help [Colorful illustration of a child]( Kaz Fantone/NPR LIFE KIT [How To Help Your Kids Reframe Their Anxiety — And Reclaim Their Superpowers]( Through all the stress and tension of 2020, NPR’s Life Kit has been especially helpful in its goal of providing guidance on being human. In a recent episode, “[How To Help Your Kids Reframe Their Anxiety — And Reclaim Their Superpowers]( Life Kit centers the mental health of children with a discussion featuring Renee Jain and Shefali Tsabary, authors of Superpowered: Transform Anxiety Into Courage, Confidence and Resilience. NPR has published [pieces]( on [kids coping with the pandemic]( but this is a more evergreen meditation that happens to be particularly relevant right now. The authors say the point is not to get rid of children's anxiety, but instead to normalize and embrace it. Their book “helps children change their relationship with anxiety, rather than change the anxiety itself,” says host Kavitha Cardoza. Like the best Life Kit episodes, this one shifts us into thinking differently, more positively and healthily, about our struggles. It validates the anxiety that children feel, which can often be overlooked or downplayed by adults. And it offers ways to improve mindsets that everyone can use, from risk assessment to mindfulness. — Kayla Randall Losing ambience in Louisiana [Flannery Denny (left) and Joel Savoy play fiddle outside the Savoy Music Center in Eunice, Louisiana]( Lily Brooks for NPR THE CORONAVIRUS CRISIS [COVID-19 Hits Hard For South Louisiana's Cajun Musicians]( NPR prides itself on reporting that connects you with people at the heart of the story. On Weekend Edition Saturday, listeners journeyed to South Louisiana, where we learned about the deep impact the pandemic has had on Cajun musicians. Four aged musicians succumbed to COVID-19, and the jam sessions held outside do not have the same ambience, according to Marc Savoy, a patriarch of Cajun music. This story by NPR’s Southwest Correspondent John Burnett gives us plenty of music, and listeners who aren’t familiar with the Acadian French ballads are given a bit of a primer. Most importantly, the musicians tell us how their lives have been deeply impacted financially and in other ways. One bandleader, who seldom leaves his house now, said seeing couples dancing to Cajun music is a beautiful thing you can’t see anywhere else. A great companion to the audio story is what’s on [NPR's website]( — portraits of some of the musicians and photos of the jam sessions that are being diminished due to the pandemic. A window into this music and the people who play it is another reason to turn to NPR for the human stories behind the coronavirus. — Amaris Castillo The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo and Kayla Randall make this newsletter possible. We are still reading all of your messages on [Facebook]( [Twitter]( and [from our inbox](. As always, keep them coming. Kelly McBride NPR Public Editor Chair, [Craig Newmark Center for Ethics & Leadership at the Poynter Institute]( [Kayla Randall, National Public Radio]( Kayla Randall, National Public Radio [Kelly McBride, Public Editor]( Kelly McBride, Public Editor [Amaris Castillo, Poynter Institute]( Amaris Castillo, Poynter Institute The Public Editor stands as a source of independent accountability. Created by NPR's board of directors, the Public Editor serves as a bridge between the newsroom and the audience, striving to both listen to the audience's concerns and explain the newsroom's work and ambitions. The office ensures NPR remains steadfast in its mission to present fair, accurate and comprehensive information in service of democracy. [Read more]( from the NPR Public Editor, [contact us]( or follow us on [Twitter](. You received this message because you're subscribed to Public Editor emails. This email was sent by National Public Radio, Inc., 1111 North Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC 20002 [Unsubscribe]( | [Privacy Policy]( [NPR logo]