Now, y ou can be the editor
Star editors have to make thousands of decisions every year. How would you have dealt with these?
Long before online quizzes became a wildly popular trend, the Star reached out to its readers to engage in an annual year-end round of an exercise we call “You be the editor.”
You might also call this a game of second guessing the Star’s editors who have responsibility — and ongoing hourly deadline pressures — to make journalistic decisions aligned with the public interest, our journalistic standards and language usage guidelines.
In the public editor’s office, we hear daily from engaged readers who question the accuracy, fairness, taste and ethics of the Star’s articles, headlines, photos, graphics, videos, editorial cartoons and social media postings.
The following scenarios represent a small sampling of the reader concerns and complaints we fielded in 2018.
Now it’s your turn to play editor and weigh in with your own judgments.
You may have reasons to publish, or not publish.
This is an exercise in trying to put yourself at the journalist’s desk to determine your own judgments if you had to make these decisions. If you were the editor, what would you do?
I will report on your decisions in an upcoming column.
1. Game 6 of the Toronto Maple Leafs’ first-round playoff game against the Boston Bruins takes place hours after the van attack in Toronto that resulted in 10 deaths and 15 injuries. Do you publish this photo of a fan taken during that game? Yes: It depicts the strong emotions of Leafs fans waiting since 1967 to see a Stanley Cup victory. No: It is an insensitive photo, in poor taste given the van tragedy.
2. A reporter in Edmonton visits a nudist colony — Canada’s northernmost — for a story about its 40th anniversary. Do you publish this photo, taken with permission of the people pictured? Yes: The image accurately depicts the nudists’ proud perspective of their “little piece of paradise.” No: The photo is distasteful.
3. Caroline Mulroney becomes a candidate for the leadership of Ontario’s Progressive Conservative party. Do you publish this editorial cartoon depicting her being wheeled in a baby buggy by her “Dad” former prime minister Brian Mulroney? Yes: Editorial cartoonists have wide latitude to satirize public issues and skewer public figures. No: This is a patronizing and sexist cartoon.
4. During the Ontario PC leadership race, do you publish this editorial cartoon depicting Russian President Vladimir Putin meddling in the campaign of candidate Doug Ford? Yes: Editorial cartoonists have wide latitude to satirize public issues and skewer public figures. No: This cartoon is highly offensive given the serious allegations of Russian meddling in the United States’ 2016 election.
5. Daniel Dale, the Star’s Washington correspondent, reports that U.S. President Donald Trump refers to Canadians as “shoe smugglers” during a rambling speech, focused on illegal immigration, to the National Federation of Independent Businesses. Do you illustrate the report with this photo? Yes: It is an accurate depiction of the president taken while delivering that speech. No: It is unflattering photo, unfair to the president.
6. A weekly Entertainment feature satirizing the content of tabloid magazines refers to a photo of Nicole Kidman’s son Connor, stating that “the kid’s chin beard and wispy moustache have ‘Daesh recruit’ written all over them.” Do you publish this reference to the terrorist organization, Daesh? Yes: This is a satire, after all. No: Comparing anyone to a terrorist because of their facial hair perpetuates a dangerous stereotype.
7. A news article about the increase in
the estimated number of women from other countries who come to Canada late in their pregnancy to give birth refers to “so-called anchor babies.” Do you publish this phrase? Yes: “Anchor babies” is a term used in academic research and published in several past Star news stories. No: “Anchor babies” is a xenophobic, inflammatory term to be avoided in this time of rising tensions about immigration.
8. A Sports column about the relationship between the Toronto Maple Leafs’
two goalies refers to William Nylander as still being “off the reservation.” Do you publish this phrase? Yes: All columnists have wide latitude to express their own views in their own tone and voice. No: This phrase is offensive and considered derogatory to Indigenous people.
9. A columnist, writing about President Donald Trump’s criticism of comedian Samantha Bee for referring on air to Ivanka Trump in a profane manner, stated that “Trump turned his atten-
tion deficit disorder toward the cultural uproar …” Do you publish this sentence? Yes: This is in a humour column and all columnists have wide latitude to express their own views in their own tone and voice. No: To equate Trump’s behaviour to ADHD is irresponsible and unfair to children with ADHD.
10. A candidate running for office in Vancouver in the fall municipal elections receives racist email messages. Do you publish this headline: “Candidate sent racist messages”? Yes: Racist messages were sent to the candidate. No: The candidate did not send racist messages.
11. Following Doug Ford’s win as leader of Ontario’s Progressive Conservative Party, a report from the Star’s Queen’s Park bureau refers to Ford “echoing his late brother Rob Ford’s ‘stop the gravy train’ mantra that won him the 2010 Toronto mayoral race before a cracksmoking scandal derailed things.” Do you publish this reference to the crack cocaine scandal involving the now deceased Rob Ford? Yes: This is a relevant fact about Doug Ford and his family. No: It is distasteful and mean-spirited given that Rob Ford has passed away.
12. In a letter to the editor submitted for publication, a reader recounts a detailed story of Air Canada refusing to allow him to bring his “comfort animal” on board — a tarantula spider named Dawn who helps him function with anxiety and depression. “Air Canada needs to do the right thing and apologize,” the letter writer states, claiming discrimination by the airline. Do you publish this letter? Yes: It is a humorous, clearly satirical letter. No: The Letters page is not the place for satire.
13. A Los Angeles Times article about Saudi Arabia published by that news organization in September, weeks before the death of slain Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, extolls “a sweeping modernization drive led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who wants to offer the country’s 32 million people something that was never a high priority: fun.” Do you publish this wire service article with the headline “A kingdom learns to laugh” in the Insight section in November, just weeks after questions arise about the Crown Prince’s knowledge about Khashoggi’s murder in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul? Yes: The article provides interesting insight into a modernization drive in Saudi Arabia. No: Considering the questions surrounding Khashoggi’s murder, this is a tone-deaf article selection.
14. A 2016 feature article about Christmas celebrations included a newlywed couple who have since broken up. Two years later, a lawyer for the woman who was interviewed for the story requests the removal of the story from the Star’s website because “it is a constant reminder of happier times which now pains my client to see in search engine results.” Do you take down (unpublish) the story? Yes: It is the compassionate thing to do. No: The Star’s policy on removal requests states that the Star does not “unpublish” its online content except in rare, often legal, circumstances that must be agreed to by senior editors.
15. A 2015 news article reports that Toronto Police laid 640 charges after an investigation into a vehicle-theft ring alleged to have stolen 500 luxury SUVs. The article includes the names of those charged with the alleged crimes. In 2018, all charges against one of the men named are dropped. The man requests his name be removed from the original news report and tells you, “I have worked diligently since 2015 alongside my lawyer to have the charges against me withdrawn as I was an innocent party in this ordeal. Please, I appeal to you to remove this content and/or my name from the article on your website so I can live my life in peace and in good standing.” Do you remove (unpublish) this information? Yes: It is the compassionate thing to do in the circumstances. No: The Star’s policy on removal requests states that the Star does not “unpublish” its online content except in rare, often legal, circumstances that must be agreed to by senior editors.