7/6/11

MURDOCK AND BROOKSIE HAVE GONE TOO FAR HACKING INTO PRIVATE VOICE MAIL ACCOUNTS : A BRITISH JOURNALISM SCANDLE : CHRISTINE TRZYNA OPINION

Scandal of the New Century ? YES! CERTAINLY! (If you haven't heard about this one yet, click on the title above to get to the Christian Science Monitor article, one of thousands of news reports about reporters !)

Do Reporters have the Right to Break a Story just because they can?

It seems that in an effort to have the news (and sell copy), there has been a severe and unforgiveable amount of privacy invasion. In this case someone who was found murdered, it is implied, may have just had a chance because, to cover their actions, journalists may have erased communications between the victim and those phoning her.

(( I think : As we know voice mail is time and date stamped. These attempts at communication are now tampered with. When, during the 6 months from missing to found dead, did these journalists pick up her voice mails and erase? Was she alive but her cell phone turned off? Had she been using it?))

THE ACTIONS OF THE JOURNALISTS, THIS EDITOR, THIS PUBLICATION and ITS OWNER are challenging existing notions and laws about privacy for the vast majority of us who are not celebrities, but in this case, even if this mudered one were a celebrity, it would still be unforgiveable: this is not the same as reporting a "baby bump" when your informant is a sales clerk on Rodeo who waits on the rich and famous.

TO THE POINT : There is need for a new and clear understanding of JOURNALISTIC BOUNDARIES these days and that means REVIEWING THE JOB DESCRIPTIONS.

Journalists should never misrepresent themselves or their intent in writing an article and SHOULD NOT BE, for instance, SNEAKS, LIARS, or LAW BREAKERS in order to get a story!

Sometimes it seems that, in search of a story and accuracy, Investigative Journalists (which includes gossip columnists) seem to be doing the job of Police Investigators, Private Eyes, Spys. The competition to get the story first is fierce, but journalists should be judged too on their professionalism and that means holding to standards! Do you have informants who remain unnamed? Of course!

INTERFERING in the work of Police Investigators, Private Eyes, and Spys, of law enforcement and the criminal justice system however, is WAY TOO FAR OVER BOUNDARIES.

I do hold the editor more responsible than those working under her. I hold editors responsible for their decision to hand out assignments and to choose to print articles as they were written and to challenge reporters to greatness.

C 2011 Christine Trzyna All Rights Reserved including Internation and Internet Rights