One of the big themes here at Balloon-Juice is the shamelessness and lack of accountability of the Village. In that light, it’s revealing to read this story about local NPR correspondent Ted Robbins’ feelings over NPR’s false report of Gabby Giffords’ death and its impact on her husband, Mark Kelly:
Robbins, who is based in Tucson, was in the room when Kelly made those remarks to Arizona Public Media and he had more than professional reasons to feel bad.
“When my wife died three years ago next month, Gabby was among those who contacted me and offered support, wanted to know how I was doing, aside from condolences, and was really wonderful – a real mensch, a human being.
“So I deeply identified with the notion that Mark felt, even for 20 minutes, that his wife had died. And then I felt some institutional – shame, I guess, is maybe a good word.”
NPR based its report on the work of two reporters. One was a Capitol Hill reporter who heard it from an anonymous congressional staffer in DC. The other was a Phoenix public radio reporter who heard it from a Pima County Sheriff’s source. So, really, they had one credible source for the report, because what sort of firsthand knowledge could a DC staffer have about a shooting while the victims are still being transported to the hospital? Running that story was just bad journalism, probably driven by a desire to be first with a grisly little tidbit about a breaking story.
Robbins had nothing to do with the report of Giffords’ death, and he was the person responsible for killing the story after talking to a source (named in the article) who talked to Giffords’ mother. Even so, he feels some shame for his organization, and he personally apologized to Mark Kelly.
In case you don’t recognize it because it’s so rare, that’s decency and accountability. We’re not used to seeing it from the Village media, so it’s worth calling it out when we see it from journalists outside the Beltway.
asiangrrlMN
I heard the ombudsman of NPR speaking about this (on MPR), and it was fascinating to me. She owned up to the error, explained what happened, and didn’t try to weasel out of it. In addition, she outlined what they would be doing differently in the future. It was refreshing.
David Fud
Kudos to NPR owning it. NPR, with what flaws they have, are truly a cut above the others.
Ija
Interestingly, the story does not mention whether the two reporters who were actually responsible for the error have apologized to Congressman Gifford’s family. In fact, they are not quoted in the story at all.
Violet
Thanks for highlighting this. I wish corrections in news were headlines.
Paul in KY
Ted Robbins is a good journalist. His empathy makes it unlikely he’ll ever ascend to ‘villager’ status.
Brachiator
Great story. Ted Robbins is indeed a real mensch.
Related to this, one of the other indecencies that reporters commit is when they point a microphone and camera at someone and ask, “How do you feel, now that you’ve learned that your loved one is dead?”
Violet
@Brachiator:
Oh, man. This is such an awful thing they do. I just hate it when I see it. I always hope that one of the ambushed interviewees will just look at the reporter and say, “How would you feel if your loved one was dead?” and say nothing more and just stare at them. It’s the height of indecency for a reporter to do that, the answer will add nothing to any viewer’s understanding of the situation, and the whole thing is nothing but tragedy p0rn. Sad excuse for news.
JRon
unfortunately for the rest of us, the lack of any sense of shame is very often what allows people to be successful in our society.
Ricky Roma
Isn’t one of the big themes here at Balloon Juice also acting like NPR is 100% part of the Village and calling anyone who listens to it a tote-bagger?
Paul in KY
@Brachiator: I don’t like this when they do it in a sports setting, let alone an actual tragedy.
In some of them, I’ve been surprised the reporter wasn’t slugged.
JRon
there are some good reporters out there around the country. they do their jobs and do them with real humanity.
I wish I could find it now, but I can’t– I recall last year an NPR All Things Considered story, where they interviewed a reporter who was writing about a body found in an abandoned warehouse. There was the sound of surprise that he would spend so much time looking into who this guy was.
The Detroit reporter, was pretty solemn and quiet in the interview, and he ended it with “Well, he was somebody’s baby.” There was such a disconnect between the tone and interest of the two journalists that I found it somewhat striking.
JRon
@Ricky Roma: NPR IS part of the village.
It’s the best place to get news on the air, but I really don’t understand how it could be considered NOT part of the DC village. I only know a couple of their reporters personally, but they’re just as much a part of the DC social scene as the network reporters I know.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@Ricky Roma: EXACTLY. I have never, ever understood the NPR-hate I’ve seen from some people here whenever it comes up.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@JRon: “Part of the Village?” So the fuck what? What’s your point?
beergoggles
This part just jumped out at me:
Apparently even the ‘good’ journalists are all chummy with the people they’re supposed to be investigating and covering. How many senator sponsored retreats and beach bbqs has Robbins been on?
Evolved Deep Southerner
@beergoggles: Jesus Christ. Are you kidding? Do you have any journalism experience?
Ija
@beergoggles:
There’s a difference between being “chummy” and exhibiting common courtesy. You don’t have to be “chummy” with someone to offer them support after the loss of a loved one. I’m sure you’ve done it with coworkers or people you know from social settings that you are not really “chummy” with. If this is not snark, there is something really wrong about you.
beergoggles
@Ija: Nope, I’ve only done it with people I know well enough to know when one of their loved ones died and they are invariably the ones I am chummy with. I’m sure there’s plenty of co-workers about 2 to 6 floors removed from me whose bereavement status is a mystery to me.
@Evolved Deep Southerner: What does having journalism experience have to do with it? Oh, you mean have politicians go out of their way to be chummy with me in the hopes of softballs.
ed
As that great DC journalist Cokie Roberts once said,
Did Ms. Roberts ever admit to any shame? Ever?
Evolved Deep Southerner
@Ija: Exactly, Ija. I’ll go you a step further. You can actually LIKE someone you cover and still have to do the hard things you have to do as a journalist if they fuck up. And if they’re genuinely your friend, they’ll understand, though it makes it harder on both people if/when those situations arise. That’s the danger.
If they don’t understand – if they expect you to cut them slack because of your friendship – then you know that they were never your friends in the first place. That makes things easier.
Omnes Omnibus
@beergoggles: Let’s just say that other people may place a higher value on interpersonal relationships and knowledge that you do. It is not odd that a politician would try to be aware of the personal circumstances of the press pool in her home town. A happy birthday here, a congrats on your promotion there, etc., that is how many people conduct ordinary interpersonal encounters. No “chumminess” needed for it.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@beergoggles: What does journalism experience have to do with it? Well, it makes a difference to me if you’ve ever been there, done that, and know what the hell you’re talking about. I assume by your response that you haven’t and don’t.
beergoggles
@Evolved Deep Southerner: Ah yes the appeal to authority fallacy. Have fun with that.
Omnes Omnibus
@beergoggles: Not actually.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@beergoggles: More like “I’ve done it, so I think I know about this kind of thing better than someone who hasn’t.” Could be a fallacy, I guess. But I know I always defer to the lawyers and accountants and such here when we’re talking about matters of law and accounting. I suppose journalism is one of those endeavors where everyone who reads a newspaper or listens to a radio news piece figures they’re an expert and know exactly what it’s like.
ThresherK
@Ricky Roma: NPR’s worldview is very Villagey. It ranges from Sarah Palin on the right all the way over to whatever hippie ideas that Communist Barack Obama has on the left. To the left of Obama? There be monsters.
NPR’s nicey-niceness is very Villagey. Nobody is ever a liar, and there’s always a spot open for some revolving door thinktank lobbyist hack to tell us why, in paragraph form, Social Security will go bankrupt in three years unless every union pensioner from New York is thrown into the poorhouse yesterday.
It’s all the viewpoints of Beltway journo work, in longer and more sedate-sounding form, which makes much of it sound more reasonable. That’s the company they keep.
But they can’t help act like professionals when the crap hits the fan.
ThresherK
@Ricky Roma: NPR’s worldview is very Villagey. It ranges from Sarah Palin on the right all the way over to whatever hippie ideas that Communist Barack Obama has on the left. To the left of Obama? There be monsters.
NPR’s nicey-niceness is very Villagey. Nobody is ever a liar, and there’s always a spot open for some revolving door thinktank lobbyist hack to tell us why, in paragraph form, Social Security will go bankrupt in three years unless every union pensioner from New York is thrown into the poorhouse yesterday.
It’s all the viewpoints of Beltway journo work, in longer and more sedate-sounding form, which makes much of it sound more reasonable. That’s the company they keep.
But they can’t help but act like professionals when the crap hits the fan.
JRon
@Evolved Deep Southerner: I just don’t see the point in pretending it’s not a part of the village. I was responding to a comment that implied that it’s not, and I don’t see the point in that.
It’s miles better than any other major news source, but it’s still often prone to the same conventional wisdom village groupthink. Have you ever listened to Cokie Roberts (to name one example)? that’s the whole point of her reports.
JRon
@ThresherK: you said that much better than I did.
Brachiator
@beergoggles:
This appears to be more in keeping with Congresswoman Giffords’ way of being than with Robbins’ “chumminess.”
Evolved Deep Southerner
See, I’ve always wondered what NPR or any other news outlet would look/sound/read like if they did it exactly how the “under-represented left” would like them to do it. I doubt it would be taken seriously.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@JRon: I wasn’t really saying they’re not citizens of the Village. They most definitely are. But as in any village, some citizens are invariably more upstanding, decent and competent than others. The point isn’t who NPR’s journalists consort with or personally like or whatever. The point is what they DO. Are they perfect? No. Is journalistic perfection in the eye of the beholder? Most definitely. That’s my point. The “perfect news source” to beergoggles or ThreskerK or you or me or whoever would be perfect to our eyes alone. Does the reader/listener/viewer not bear any responsibility at all in this equation?
Paul in KY
@ThresherK: I’ve seen a big change in NPR from 2000 on. Not a good change, either.
I hope this reporter’s ethics don’t stop him from advancing his career, as he seems to be the kind of reporter we need more of.
ThresherK
@JRon: Yeah, but I still can’t manage not to submit something 2x when I thought I was editing!
@Evolved Deep Southerner: But NPR isn’t taken seriously the moment they step off the reservation. They are part of the “even the liberal NPR” dumptruck of feces when Mara Liasson or Cokehead are going all Beltway Inbred. Turn it around, and the second they do something “wrong” they find out how much friendship their whoring has secured.
It is telling how interested the “under-represesnted left” wants real journalism to infect big media corps, whereas the right’s wishes are for everything Fox News does, except with the label CNN, NYT or ABC on it.
JRon
@Evolved Deep Southerner: I don’t disagree with that. I thought the point of the post was that the local reporter felt some shame for how the story made Giffords’ husband feel.
And my point is that, however good I think specific individual reporters in DC may be (and there are several), that there are some very humane local reporters that often have a strikingly different view of the humanity and impact of their own work. Whether that is attributable to the heavily conservative influence of living in DC (that I’ve witnessed–so it’s only anecdotally to me), or not, I don’t know, but I often chalk up running in those high circles with a disconnection from the humanity of how the rest of the country lives and feels.
Whether it’s a total lack of understanding of how insane a large amount of people on the right out here truly are (because their experience with conservatives are seemingly reasonable politicos), or a meta focus on daily polls in place of the impact of real policy, I tend to attribute that and other disconnects to an inevitable immersion in DC culture. Our politicians suffer from it too.
For example, after Obama was elected, our npr station in Atlanta ran an interview with McCain supporters that said the outcome was worse than 9/11. My DC family, at least the ones who voted McCain, did not believe that was possible, that surely I took it out of context. One had reported on the irresponsibility of the Palin rhetoric at the time and still thought it was hyperbole on my part.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@ThresherK: I’m not sure I’m clear which “reservation” you’re talking about them leaving here. And Fox is only taken seriously by seriously gullible and willfully ignorant fools. That is a slice of the media consumership pie and they’ve got almost all of that, but I know of no intelligent person who takes them seriously. And this “real journalism” infection you speak of. Please define it. If NPR kicked Cokie Roberts and Mara Liasson and Brooks and all of those people off the air and … what? What else would make their journalism “real” to you?
Evolved Deep Southerner
@JRon:
A great example. Do you not think that NPR’s listeners took that interview and had the same takeaway you had? You must let the asses bray to know that they are asses, and I feel sure that this was both a “let the asses bray” and “gotta have the other side” moment. Sounds like it was a PERFECT element of that particular story. Not “Here we are presenting the other side, and by presenting it we expect every viewer to regard it with the same seriousness as every other side of this story,” but “Here are these people. Listen how pathetic they are.”
Oscar Leroy
But the biggest theme is whining about how some people say things you don’t agree with.
Evolved Deep Southerner
@Oscar Leroy: This. Thank you.
Gin & Tonic
@Oscar Leroy:
I don’t get it. Who’s holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read this blog? Whining about people saying things you don’t agree with is 90% of the blogosphere.
Arclite
This reporter just signed his own pink slip.
Ija
@Gin & Tonic:
But what about whining about people whining about people saying thing you don’t agree? How many percent is that?
Sorry, lame joke alert. I’m just being silly :)
Evolved Deep Southerner
@Gin & Tonic: I love this blog. I’ve been reading and enjoying it for a long time. I agree with a whole lot of what’s said here by both the front-pagers and the commenters. We’re talking about NPR. For the commenters here to expect NPR to become “The Balloon-Juice of the Airwaves” is what I’m talking (I wouldn’t call it whining) about.
justawriter
I worry whenever I hear people say there are questions that a reporter shouldn’t ask. The line between that and questions you are no longer allowed to ask becomes vanishingly thin. “How do you feel?” is an question that allows the subject to frame their own statement about the event in question. Outside of something like “What would you like to say?” it is probably the least loaded question that could be asked. We need to remember that the previous administration used “the feelings of the families” to bar any reporting of the bodies coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan. IIRC, they used similar excuses to try and keep reporters out of Walter Reed, but fortunately the wounded vets could speak for themselves. So I am torn, yes reporters should be more considerate, and no, nobody should force them to do so.
Mike M
I live in Phoenix and the assumption that Giffords had been killed was widely reported for the first hour or so. The major news stations would say that her death was not confirmed and that they were attempting to get official confirmation. Other radio stations were not so careful in how they reported. The number of people thought to have been shot or killed varied widely between stations.
There were many witnesses to the shooting, several of which were interviewed on air before there was any official statement from the police or the university medical center. There were news crews on scene within minutes of the shooting, early enough in fact to film ambulances pulling away from the Safeway. I recall one witness saying that Giffords wasn’t moving as she was taken away.
The first news on local stations that Giffords survived was attributed to Giffords’ husband and then later a Giffords staff person. Official word was only that she had been shot; the fact that she survived was announced much later — if I remember correctly, when she was out of surgery.
Only Me
I lived in Tucson for about a couple of decades, and always thought that Ted Robbins was a good reporter for the local PBS/NPR affiliate. I was happy for him when he got the “promotion” to NPR, but was somewhat worried that his reporting might suffer. Since then I have heard his reports, and found that he seems still to be a decent reporter. Gabby Giffords was in AZ state politics for a while before being elected to Congress, and I am not surprised that she and Robbins know each other fairly well, based on Robbins’ long time reporting in Southern AZ. Based on nothing other than their professional acquaintance, that Giffords would offer at least condolences to Robbins when he lost his wife seems like simple decency to me. I can’t say that I see any sign of professionally inappropriate “chumminess” in such a gesture.
ThresherK
@ Southerner: And Fox is only taken seriously by seriously gullible and willfully ignorant fools.
First, I use the moniker Fox as shorthand for all tilted, self-reinforcing low-information media. That’s something I shouldn’t be so broad-brushed about. It includes Rushbo, Drudge (and therefore Politico), CNS (yes, Conservative News Service), and many other story sources.
However, NPR, especially the mothership, are the same people who let far too much of their assignment editing, taste-making and agenda setting be done by the right wing propoganda media.
NPR is so openminded that it can’t tell the difference between the charge that Barack Obama is a Communist and that Dick Cheney is a war criminal. If they tag along so heavily to the people who value Savvy above all else, why are they so gullible?
I can’t define the “perfect news source”. But I can certain suss out that “even the liberal NPR” is not able to fight its way leftward out of a wet paper bag. That wouldn’t be bad except for the concept that it’s a balanced source of ideas, even a marketplace, if you will.
As far as what the consumer is responsible for, I can’t count the number of times NPR gets some tilted panel where the host is the left-most person on the air, and some right-wing jackass (ex:Mona Charen) is interviewed seriously, and the online board blows up. Just effing blows up. That’s because NPR hosts tend to be leftish, and for “balance”, but NPR hosts aren’t supposed to be argumentative. It’s not in the DNA of NPR for hosts to shut down guests or call them liars. And it’s a biiiiig problem when the host is the left-most person on the air. Therefore, the falsehoods perpetrated for political gain by the left and the right are given the same privilege.
As a one-time hack journo in college, I want better. I want to consume the product without my alarm going off. I don’t know what perfect journalism is, but I can see where the improvements need to be made for NPR. I wouldn’t care but it has the best potential for good work to a widespread audience out there.
Brachiator
@justawriter:
While I agree that there are, in general, no questions that a reporter should not be able to ask, too much reporting is sensationalized nonsense. I’ve never heard a person, obviously in shock and pain from losing someone to an accident or crime, say anything remotely newsworthy when asked how they feel about the incident. It is little more than news p0rn.
This kind of stunt ranks up with storm reporting where a news person has to stand out in the middle of a hurricane, or give a news report from the location hours after everything has happened, in an irrelevant meaningless closeup that does little more than give a reporter face time, but is not news in any significant sense.
beergoggles
@Evolved Deep Southerner: Ah, by your logic we should leave it to just lawyers to criticize decisions like Citizens United.
And to be totally honest, it’s not so much the chumminess that disturbs me about the media and journalists but the lack of disclosure. At least with outlets like Greenwald or KOS or Balko, I can view their reporting with the baggage of their funding and tilt and as such I would consider myself better informed. With most of the Village media, I have less of an idea who’s being used as a sock puppet.
Evolved Deep Southerner
By my logic, you can point to some grievous slack Ted Robbins has cut Gabrielle Giffords – some scandal of hers he’s overlooked, some way he’s gone out of his way to give her especially fawning coverage in the past – or, by my logic, I don’t know what your fucking point is.
asiangrrlMN
@Brachiator: What you said. Bodies coming back from Iraq is news. How an individual feels after a loved one is killed is not news. It’s not saying anything newsworthy. It’s not, forgive me, adding anything to the bigger picture. Honestly, if a reporter asked me that after a loved one died (especially in a unexpected way), I would not be very nice to that reporter.
As for NPR, I find it frustrating to listen to because they refuse to say what is a fact and what isn’t. Much of it is, “Republicans say the healthcare reform is going to evaporate the entire country in one single blink. President Obama says if we continue under the current system, we will increase the debt.” One of these statements is clearly false. Label it such.
I much prefer MPR to NPR.
Paul in KY
@ThresherK: I think that once Bush/Cheney took over, they stacked it with cronies who have intentionally fostered the kind of stuff you talked about in your post.
I’m hoping Pres. Obama’s administration is able to reverse the slanting somehow.
Paul in KY
@Brachiator: They seem to be doing that in hopes that the person loses their cool in some way. Raging/crying people seem to be ratings gold.
Brachiator
@asiangrrlMN:
Yep. NPR (and much of the mainstream media) mistakenly believes that neutral or objective reporting means regurgitating what both sides said, instead of noting lies, falsehoods and distortions.
Is that Minnesota Public Radio? Is there a particular station I could stream and check out? Out here in Southern California, KPCC, 89.3 is a great public station, and I think that two news and interview shows are often outstanding: Larry Mantle’s Air Talk and Patt Morrison’s afternoon show.
beergoggles
@Evolved Deep Southerner: You surmised that I would need to be a journalist to criticize another journalists actions and the example of a lawyer and CU was my response.
And I do not have an example of this particular journalist pandering to this particular congressman, but I have seen how NPR redacted congress member names when the film Outrage was reviewed and I have distrusted them since.
I doubt u’ll actually end up reading this, but I figured I’d actually respond for posterity sake.
Ted Robbins
Thanks for the kind words. A couple of clarifications after reading the comments here, (which are uncommonly civil for a website of any kind):
1) I cover Arizona, New Mexico, and Nevada on staff for NPR full time. I’m not a local reporter, though I used to be. I live in Tucson by choice.
2) RE “chumminess”: I live in Giffords’ district. Whether I voted for her is irrelevant. I am a constituent. I also cover her. I have purposely maintained a professional distance. Her expression of sympathy at my wife’s death was simple decency. The reason I mentioned it was because I identified with her husband thinking his wife had died. That’s all. I take no junkets or meals or tennis matches or whatever.
3) I find it odd that Fox, CNN, local stations–even the newspaper which published the story you quote– made the same mistake, yet only NPR publicly examined the mistake. And only NPR has been pummeled for it. Which, to me, shows more balls than the rest combined.