Those stories are hard to cover. But I am beginning to wonder if the tragedies journalists are obligated to tell are a bit easier to cover for a newspaper in comparison to TV--especially when it comes to children.
I've been working for the last week on a package about an amazing kid named Austin. He's 16 and has been living with Batten Disease for the last eight years. The rare neurological disease has essentially robbed him of his ability to, among other things, walk, talk and see. If research doesn't turn into good medicine soon, the disease will likely kill Austin.
The story is sad and now as a multi-platform journalist, I've struggled with the continual notion that I might be exploiting Austin's story. For example, it felt uncomfortable to videotape his tremors, even thought I knew such video would help me explain his plight.
I did shoot the tremors and, while I don't regret it, I have come up with my own code of ethics of sorts when it comes to covering sad news that involve children--particularly those who are vulnerable.
1. If the story has the potential to be controversial, I'll seek parental permission.
2. If the source doesn't have the capacity to understand what is happening, I'll seek out an advocate on his/her behalf before I pursue an interview.
3. I won't use video of children that exploits them.
4. I won't craft a story about children that is in vain; it needs to serve a purpose.
Austin is an amazing guy. Meeting him has been a highlight of my time as a budding TV reporter. I hope the story I produced--and the guidelines I've put in place aimed at protecting him--does his life justice.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment