An article from The Poynter Institute brings up an interesting question when it comes to writing crime stories: Is a person’s immigration status relevant information?
With illegal immigration being a hot-button issue in the United States this question is starting to pop up in newsrooms a lot. Editors now have to deal with it the same way they deal with releasing a person’s race in a crime story. And to that end I think that one’s immigration status should follow the same guidelines as race does: Namely, it is really pertinent to the story to provide necessary information to the reader? If yes, then it is included. If no, then it is left out. Unless the crime might involve a person’s immigration status, the way crimes may be “racially motivated,” it should be left out. Perhaps an illegal immigrant has been in the country for a number of years and is taking the steps needed to become a citizen. It would be a shame for a story to end their chances of becoming a citizen just because an editor felt that immigration status was essentially to the story. In addition, the reader might form their own opinion of the person in the crime story anyway, without having to be told the status of the immigrant.
What do you think? Does the public really have the “right to know” in this case?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment