By: Alexandra Murphy
As a journalist, you will often encounter stories where you become overly attached to a source in some way, shape, or form. While it is important to be an empathetic journalist, it is also drilled into fellow reporters, including myself, that you must always maintain a certain level of objectivity. So, how close is too close for comfort when having a relationship with a source and where do we draw the line?
Journalists can spend weeks, months, and in some cases even years getting to know their sources carefully and personally. Learning personal information about and source’s family life, finding out about a traumatic incident the source has had, you name it. When growing this close to knowing an individual’s personal life, it can be difficult to withhold from exchanging a personal back and forth to empathize with the person being interviewed.
Some journalists may even find themselves in the difficult position of wanting to relate to the source so that the conversation does not feel awkward or one sided. This is why it is imperative as a journalist to refer back to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics and to always be upfront with your newsroom and your reader when disclosing source relationships.
My belief is that to remain objective there is an invisible line that should be drawn when reaching out for the initial interview, during the interview, and even after the story is published if the piece requires a follow up with the source. A large part of drawing this line is being completely transparent with the public about your relationship to a source. Then, later down the line if you are able to get the scoop on a source, there is no question of your intentions on how you obtained the information.
The SPJ Code of Ethics states, “a journalist’s job is to seek the truth and report it.”
One example of a reporter who did not follow this important guideline was Nina Totenburg, a well-known, reputable correspondent for NPR, who had a controversial friendship with source Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The Supreme Court reporter released a book in 2022 titled, “Dinners with Ruth”, which sparked a debate about conflict of interest with source relationships and if this would give off the impression that journalists are no longer loyal to the public.
In my opinion, I believe that Totenburg being friendly and having a large amount of respect for Ruth Bader Ginsburg was not the issue at hand because as a journalist, it is important to build relationships with your sources. However, I think she crossed the fine line between building a relationship and having a close friendship where this line became blurred and the implications impacted her reputation as an ethical journalist. After all, in her book she stated that she had known about Ruth Bader Ginsburg falling ill prior to her death on Sept. 18, 2020.
This is an ethical issue I struggle with to this day because as an empathetic individual, it becomes challenging to maintain objectivity and professionalism when reporting on an emotional topic. Going into the journalism profession, I accepted this challenge with a full understanding of how difficult it was going to be.
One of the most touching stories I have ever had the opportunity to report on was covering the busing of migrants from Texas to Chicago. I couldn’t help but to tear up in the moments talking with those directly affected because, how could I just sit there, and stare blank faced at a situation that is so horrifying and has had an impact on so many people.
Sometimes, it can become easy to forget that journalists are human too and are allowed to feel emotions for their sources. Having difficult emotions, being empathetic, or simply checking in with a source is not wrong. Withholding information from the public when wanting to protect a source is when having too close a relationship with a source becomes unethical.
-30-