I’ve slagged the current crop of television reporters quite thoroughly in a previous post, because they deserve it. In the interest of being fair and balanced (not the FOXNews Unfair and Truly Unbalanced) I’m going to explain what I mean by a good reporter. I’ve done enough reporting and sat through my share of butt-numbing council meetings to find nothing at the end of four hours worth reporting, even to shut-ins. I’ve done the cop beat and written my share of fuzz and wuz stories. The cops (the fuzz) went on a call and the following people (the wuz) are dead. I didn’t care for that kind of work.All reporting starts with Who, What, When, Where and Why. You can do this yourself by reading a newspaper story and writing down on the paper where you see each W answered. Use a pen, a pencil, a Sharpie, or even a charcoal briquette if you want. That is rudimental, essential reporting.A good reporter comes into work, scans the news services and reads a few newspapers to see, approximately, what is going on. Then they sit and think for a bit. Good reporters use a simple question: Qui Bono? Qui Bono translates from the Latin, more or less, as Who Profits?Look at the string of facts regarding a story and after the basics of Who, What, When, Where, Why, ask Qui Bono? For some stories the Qui Bono answer is We Do, meaning, society at large. Meth dealer taken into custody? Good thing for the imperial We. Not all stories have another story hidden down in the guts somewhere. The same could be true with a two car collision at an intersection. It could end with a recitation of the facts. Take our construct of a two-car fender bender at an intersection. Here are some story ideas: Bad intersection design? Drunk/Sleepy drivers? Cellphones and cars? Child Safety Seats? Auto Repair Scams? Healthcare letting the injured fall through the cracks? Insurance companies nailing people with unholy rate increases? Ambulance response times? Does the Fire Department spend more time going to piddly fender benders than inspecting highrises for sprinklers and fire safety? How much does it really cost to have two cops, four firefighters, and four ambulance attendants get to and service a simple fender bender? Is there an environmental impact to car crashes, since all the radiator coolant and oil runs into the sewers and out to where? What happens to those cars in the junkyard? Are we really recycling as much as we like to think we are?As an aside, I wrote that list of story ideas in less than four minutes. It isn’t very hard to do, even for a guy who has not graduated from a second-rate community college. Some of the story ideas might even lead to a nice, juicy scandal at the end of it.The next step of Qui Bono is sourcing and fact checking. For every fact, except some of the obvious ones, I want to see two sources, preferably independent sources. I don’t need two sources to verify that the two cars hit at 2:14 pm at the corner of Bank street and Walkley road. The police report is sufficient for date, time and location, even to the most jaundiced, black-helicopter cynic. For most of the other stuff, I do want two, or more, sources. Using our fender-bender story again, follow along: If an auto bodyshop manager says they only use new, factory parts in repairing the cars involved, then I want to take the cars to another bodyshop and have it confirmed, or see the actual factory markings on the parts. The reason I want to prove it is Qui Bono. In our mythical story, the auto bodyshop could use counterfeit or generic parts to fix the cars involved, but bill the insurance companies for the more expensive factory parts and pocket the difference. There is a profit motive for the bodyshop manager to mislead the reporter that can only be uncovered by checking the facts. Now I’ve got a story. How much does your car insurance cost? How much of that cost is insurance repair fraud? What is the industry doing to stop it? What are the penalties for doing that kind of fiddle? Why aren’t the penalties stronger? And so on.This takes time and occasionally money. Often there is no story to chase, but once in a while there is a story. It takes some effort from the reporter and some willingness of the news outlet to do the chasing.It is much easier for news outlets to take the press release, rewrite it, then have the reporter do a stand-up, top and tail, in front of the House of Commons. Edit in a clip of the MP from CPAC, our CSPAN. Then, we need a clip from the Opposition, again from CPAC and some stock footage of whatever the story is about. Wheat, immigrants, security, ocean rights, doesn’t matter, just a clip or two of generic things on the subject will do.We have now created a minute and a half television news story by rewriting a press release. We have also successfully avoided doing any journalism, reporting, or thinking.Qui Bono now? We, as consumers of news, do not profit from this. The groups who do profit from substandard reporting are two. First are the media outlets who don’t have to spend time and resources. Newspapers, magazines, television and radio are profit-driven businesses, which is fine, but know that less cost is good for them. Second are, those in positions of power who continue to steal from us, lie to us, or mislead us, knowing that reporters will not, cannot and have no clue how to look too closely.Now you know how to be a good journalist: Ask Who, What, When, Where, Why, Qui Bono and find at least two sources for all the facts. The next time you see a reporter, on or in any media, measure them against those simple standards. Did they do their job as they should? Too often they don’t, which means we have all kinds of information, but not a whole lot of news. Know the difference.
RoadDave 