I think there is no correct way to present the content of a quote. AP tells us one way but the practice of many others tells us another, hence the ethic debate within the Washington Post newsroom. As far as being educated on the subject, I was taught in JRN 200 that even if the interviewee's grammar wasn't exactly English perfect, it still made for an interesting quote, as long as what they said was in quotation marks. I also agree with the reporter who had written the quote that it may have saved embarrassment for the athlete, but there could have been other ways in which he could have written it. The content may have been embarrassing to the athlete, but regardless how sensitive the subject was, did the athlete not present the information in public?
However the information was given, there are ethical ways of publishing the information. Simply use a summary quote. Suppose the quote had been EXAMPLE: "'I aint gonna think U-M will ever win another darn game," U-M Tailback Mike Hart said.' Instead the reporter could have written it as "U-M Tailback Mike Hart goes into next week's game a little hesitant, but he and the team strive to dig out of this team slump." A summary quote is just one of many ways the reporter could have written it to avoid ethical controversy.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment