What belongs in the news?

NPR audience members question journalistic choices [View this email online]( [NPR Public Editor by Poynter's Kelly McBride]( Today we address two critiques about information that was included in stories and one critique about information that seemed to disappear from the homepage. NPR listeners, at least those who write to the Public Editor, seem keenly aware that every single journalistic choice is also an ethical choice. In our first letter, a listener was alarmed to hear an education professional say that he was communicating with despondent school superintendents who say the pressures of running schools have caused them to think about suicide. The listener wanted more warning. In our next letter, a listener disagreed with NPR’s choice to describe a particular think tank as “nonpartisan.” That turned out to be a very good comment, not because it revealed a mistake, but because it resulted in the surfacing of a variety of definitions for that term. Finally, a regular visitor to NPR’s homepage wondered where the consistent COVID-19 data went. Each of these letters is about a specific decision that involves many ethical questions. What information is needed to tell the most accurate truth? How does NPR anticipate the needs of its vast audience and create the most journalistic good? How do journalists balance their obligation to minimize potential harm with their other duties? Read on to see how we answered each of these queries. Here are a few quotes from the Public Editor's inbox that resonated with us. Letters are edited for length and clarity. You can share your questions and concerns with us through the [NPR Contact page](. A reference to suicidal thoughts Kathry Yarzebinski writes: A little warning would have been nice this morning. [I was listening]( with my 9-year-old son when your segment announced very bluntly that school administrators are suicidal. Not only does my son adore his school administrators, his Dad is a school administrator. You can imagine the questions and worry at 7:30 a.m. when you shifted from "school officials are concerned" to a guest clip stating "school officials are suicidal" with absolutely no warning — and even the [host] sounded shocked. ... This story was a look at how educators are coping with the spike in COVID cases and the possibility of returning to remote school. Cory Turner, NPR’s education correspondent, told us that he didn’t include the reference to suicide lightly. NPR’s education correspondents have been interviewing administrators about the [many pressures they face]( including [keeping kids and teachers safe]( [managing the debates on critical race theory]( and [monitoring students’ mental health concerns]( — and [all of the people shouting their opinions]( on each of these matters has made administrators’ jobs feel like no-win situations. “It can feel impossible to these educators. To the point that it’s important sharing [that some] would consider suicide,” he said. The topic came up at the end of the interview with Dan Domenech, head of the School Superintendents Association, when Turner asked him if there was anything else to add that he wouldn’t have known to ask about. While a school superintendent might not have shared such vulnerable information with a reporter, Domenech was in a position to do that without causing harm or shame. He said, “Superintendents calling me, telling me that they’re ready to commit suicide. That — I’ve never, ever seen a period of time where I’ve had to deal with that.” Turner felt an obligation to report it. “As an education reporter, if I can’t share those honest truths, as hard as they are to hear, then I don't feel like I’m being honest,” he said. Before playing the quote, Turner warned listeners, “And he told me he’s heard something from a few superintendents personally that he’s never heard before. And I should say this might be a little hard to hear.” He specifically used the clip toward the end of the segment so Rachel Martin, the Morning Edition host, could quickly follow up with information about the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, which is something ethicists recommend when [reporting on suicide](. Yet, even with a warning and resources, the information is jarring. Turner has two young kids and says he’s had to have very difficult conversations with them about the news, so he empathizes with the fear your child experienced hearing the segment. “I would never, ever include a cut of tape in a piece of my journalism simply for the shock,” Turner said. “I included it because for the last two years, I have absorbed so much hurt and pain from school workers, be they teachers, staff members, principals, superintendents. It is hard for me to overstate how much these folks have been through.” While pandemic-related news mentioning the mental health toll, including thoughts of suicide, can be tough to consume, we believe it needs to be carefully reported with empathy to bring light to this issue, as Turner did. The only alternative is to not talk about it at all, which would be far more harmful. — Emily Barske If you or someone you know is having thoughts about suicide, contact the [National Suicide Prevention Lifeline]( 1-800-273-8255. ‘Nonpartisan’ is a non-helpful distinction Harry Bulkeley writes: Characterizing the Brennan Center as “[nonpartisan]( was clearly misleading. Knowing that NPR wants to appear impartial, you could have been correct (while still making your political point) by not labeling it at all. ... The story you referenced was a year-end roundup of developments around voting rights in 2021 and a look ahead into 2022. All Things Considered host Mary Louise Kelly interviewed Wendy Weiser from the Brennan Center for Justice. As director of the center’s Democracy Program, Weiser specializes in enhancing political participation and preventing voter disenfranchisement — a solid expert to discuss the topic. As Kelly introduced Weiser, she described the Brennan Center as “​​a nonpartisan think tank that works to defend systems of democracy and justice.” That’s accurate. The Brennan Center is nonpartisan, meaning that it does not participate in or contribute to campaigns for political candidates. It says so on its website and it has a nonprofit designation from the IRS. There is a difference between the IRS definition of nonpartisan and the dictionary definition of nonpartisan. To the [IRS]( “nonpartisan” means an organization doesn’t work on political races. In the [dictionary]( nonpartisan is much more vague: “Free from party affiliation, bias or designation.” If you are in Washington D.C., if you run a nonprofit or if you think about politics a lot, the IRS definition is probably the first thing that comes to mind when you hear “nonpartisan.” But for others, maybe most people, “nonpartisan” often means “not politically biased.” These days, with Democrats [pursuing]( two voting rights bills and Republican legislatures [pushing]( for voting restrictions, the issue is highly politicized. The Brennan Center is dedicated to strengthening and reforming these systems in ways that Democrats would generally support. While it wasn’t inaccurate, we agree that the word “nonpartisan” is not helpful to a listener who might be trying to figure out the philosophy or point of view of the center. Your suggestion to just leave it out is a good one. Simply describing the Brennan Center’s mission is all that listeners need to understand why its experts are qualified on this topic and what their point of view is. — Kelly McBride Where’s the COVID data on the homepage? John Beals writes: You have no updates on the number of C19 cases [on your homepage.] This absence of information is troubling. … It is hard to make good choices if there is no up to date info for people. … My issue was with the take down of the headline: “How is the COVID-19 vaccination campaign going in your state?” This has been on the front page for many months and it is a good way to see the changes going on with C19. It is easy to read and consistent in its format so it helps to look at it over time. When it dropped off it made me wonder why. … I can assure you people have not stopped looking for the latest info on C19. … News organizations play an important role in how we approach decisions around our health. Up-to-date information helps us protect ourselves and our families. Almost two years after the World Health Organization [declared COVID-19 a pandemic]( NPR is still keeping track of national coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths. I reached out to Emily Barocas, NPR’s deputy director of digital platforms and curation, who told me that NPR updates and maintains several COVID-related dashboards that are rotated on the homepage. One of those is the one you referred to in your email, on [vaccine rollout]( which is updated on Mondays and Thursdays. Others include a [coronavirus global map]( [U.S. cases]( and data on how [hospitals are faring](. As of this week, the headline you mentioned is still present on NPR’s homepage, though not featured prominently. It’s near the very bottom. “The homepage team generally features the dashboard that feels most relevant to what is in the news at any given time, or the dashboard that is most recently updated,” Barocas said in an email. “So, our loyal reader can keep checking back for the one they are most interested in or use the links … to access each of the dashboards even when they are not featured on the homepage.” Like any news organization, the NPR homepage is prime real estate and special consideration is given when deciding which stories can stay there for an extended period of time. Most of the time, there is an active link to COVID data. But you can always bookmark a preferred page on your web browser for easier access. — Amaris Castillo 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. Testing, testing [Employees of the Miami-Dade Public Library System distribute COVID-19 home rapid test kits in Miami, Florida, on January 8, 2022.]( Chandan Khanna/AFP via Getty Images CONSIDER THIS FROM NPR [Why COVID Tests Are Still So Scarce And Expensive — And When That Could Change]( NPR has helpfully been reporting on the costs of and access to COVID-19 tests. Earlier this week, [All Things Considered]( covered how the USPS began to take orders for free at-home rapid test kits. Last week, [Consider This]( informed listeners about how, in some areas of the country, people are paying hundreds of dollars for COVID-19 tests. It’s a thorough story that explores the current situation, why there’s such a wide range of testing costs and how testing companies are profiting. — Kayla Randall The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo, Kayla Randall and Emily Barske make this newsletter possible. Illustrations are by Carlos Carmonamedina. 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]( Kelly McBride Public Editor Kayla Randall NPR Amaris Castillo Poynter Institute Emily Barske 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]