Balancing ethical journalism: Mindfulness and reporting on tragic events

dmoseley Student Perspectives

by Samantha Moilanen

Growing up, my exposure to television and electronics was limited. Like most parents, mine feared my sister and I would grow up reliant on technology for our entertainment. Nevertheless, whenever I had the opportunity, I would “discreetly” watch my parents’ TV shows, which typically included programs such as Cold Case, Criminal Minds and Law and Order.

My fascination with crime shows from a young age sparked my interest in investigative journalism. As I began my journalistic career, I found myself drawn to reporting on crimes or any societal injustices.

But one question continually haunts me: How do we fulfill our duty to report the truth while minimizing harm to victims, particularly in cases of traumatic events like mass shootings?

Since Columbine, there have been 386 school shootings in the U.S., according to data from the Washington Post updated in June.

The horrifying reality of school shootings hit close to home in November 2021 with the Oxford High School shooting in Michigan and, again, in February when Michigan State University became a target for an active shooter.

As a reporter, when covering crimes like these we quickly rush to the scene, not thinking about our safety or well-being, but only that we have to break the news of this horrific tragedy because the public deserves to know what is happening. It’s our job after all.

Yet, as journalists we also have to be mindful of how we cover these events. Behind the headlines and troubling statistics are people who have experienced unimaginable pain and suffering. We can’t forget why we do what we do. Yes, we have to break the news. But taking an extra minute to truly analyze what we’re reporting before we hit send can make a drastic difference.

Ashley Yuckenberg, an assistant professor at George Mason University wrote her dissertation on the ethical quandaries of crisis coverage as a journalist. Her research focused specifically on school shootings and analyzed how missteps in local coverage distorted the national conversation about these events.

In the well-known 1999 Columbine shooting, reporters interviewed traumatized students immediately after surviving arguably the worst experience of their lives.

Was this ethical? Of course, journalists should always interview the people directly impacted, but should they have waited?

Yuckenberg found false rumors were then reported as fact in an effort to quickly break the news which resulted in forming the stereotype of the disaffected, gun-obsessed American school shooter that lives on in our imagination today. Yuckenberg uncovered another alarming aspect that was added to the narrative shaped by the media: the suggestion that goth culture played a motivating role in school shootings.

In 2017, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a set of guidelines for journalists to follow when reporting on mass shootings. Some general principles included avoiding angles or language that could potentially glamorize the perpetrator’s actions, thus influencing copycat behavior, avoiding stories that could retraumatize survivors, and avoiding language that could stigmatize people living with mental illness.

Yuckenberg used her research to come up with five ethical issues for journalists to consider when covering mass shootings. First, be mindful of relying on unverified information from witnesses who still may be in shock because it can result in misinformation. Second, avoid including details that may sensationalize the crime and retraumatize victims. Only include information that benefits society as a whole. Third, be mindful of how your coverage could influence copycat crimes. Fourth, always offer information from both sides and contextualize all statements regarding issues like mental health. Finally, be mindful of missing information as a crisis is unfolding. Sharing the full story is important but also be aware of how the information is affecting survivors.

I never want to be the journalist who chases the story to the point that they forget why they are reporting it in the first place. I think it’s easy to get caught up in the fast-pace of the 24-hour news cycle and making a deadline can sometimes seem like the top priority. But I also want to challenge myself to practice mindfulness when reporting on crimes of all nature, and to remember that the story isn’t just a story, but these are people too.

Reporting on immigration: More nuanced conversations needed, “it doesn’t start and stop at the border”

dmoseley Journalist Profiles

By Stephania Rodriguez

The arrival of thousands of migrants in Chicago (most of them from Central and South America) in recent months has stirred up conversations about how journalists should cover their stories. Though it’s not a new phenomenon in our country’s (or humanity’s) history, it’s a topic that undergoes continuous transformations in discourse, and therefore, deserves to open discussion about how it should be covered.

Maria Inés Zamudio, an award-winning investigative journalist and current reporter for the Center for Public Integrity, has been covering immigration for over a decade. It’s a nuanced topic that she said takes time and effort to understand and must be approached cautiously.

It was Zamudio’s identity and cultural background that would help lead her to reporting on immigration.  A Mexican immigrant herself, her journalistic career began with an internship at the Springfield News-Leader in Southwest Missouri. There her editor looked to her for guidance on how to cover the area’s migrant community.

“I was in my early 20’s,” Zamudio said. “I didn’t really know what I was doing, and it was difficult. But it was the beginning [of my understanding] that because of who I am and my language and cultural skills, I have to cover this community.”

From there Zamudio dedicated time to enhancing her understanding of immigration policy and history. She said any journalist interested in immigration reporting should do the same.

“Immigration reporting, it doesn’t start, and it doesn’t stop at the border,” she said. “This new wave of immigrants – it’s just that, another wave of immigrants. So, I would argue that if you want to do immigration reporting, to really study history and to understand how those policies really influence the flow of migration, and why certain things are the way that they are.”

Knowing your facts and history can help you uncover more ideas for stories, she said.  The “hidden gems” of stories that are not being told.

Zamudio’s reporting has highlighted the consequences of miseducation of undocumented immigrants with U.S. law, U.S. military veterans deported under the Trump administration, and the dangers that Central American women face while traveling through Mexico as they try to reach the United States.

As she continued to learn and cover the beat, Zamudio said she was always concerned about the consequences her reporting might bring to the people she spoke to.  She said it’s important for journalists to give their sources “informed consent,” and take the time to explain what their participation in a story will look like and what they may be risking.

Today, some media organizations have begun to create and share guides online that outline standards of practice for immigration reporting, something Zamudio said she didn’t have when she began her career.  Some examples she referenced include the National Association for Hispanic Journalists’ Cultural Competence Handbook and the Dart Center.

“When I came into this business, we were still having conversations about whether or not to use the term ‘illegal immigrants’,” she said. “And back then, AP Style was very much [recommending the use of the term].”

Even after informing themselves with all the knowledge and the best standards of practice, reporting on immigration or any story that involves trauma can lead journalists to find themselves in situations that they’re not sure how to handle.  For young journalists, Zamudio said there is one tool they can always use as a guiding compass when encountering an ethical dilemma: themselves.

“What I tell young people is, try and figure out what you are comfortable living with,” she said. “Because at the end of the day, the editors, or whomever pressures you to do something that you may or may not want to do, it’s not their name or their story, it’s yours.”

-30-

A Conversation with Ismael Estrada on His Year in Uvalde

dmoseley Journalist Profiles

By Alyssa Gomez

My days are numbered before I am on air at my first news station and there is one daunting question that continues to remain unanswered, should I ever be in the situation that so many reporters have found themselves in. I have wondered how do we, as journalists, approach reporting on mass shootings in America that does justice to the people and brings them humanity? How do we respectfully report and differentiate each situation, so it does not flash across the screen to our audiences as “just another mass shooting?”

Ismael Estrada had just spent the last year in Uvalde, Texas when he graciously answered my phone call.

He explained to me how he covered many mass shootings prior to Uvalde; Newtown, Parkland, and Santa Fe. In the wake of a mass shooting, many news outlets spend weeks in town, seeing how they recover, and if the perpetrator is caught. And then they leave.  No more news coverage.

ABC Network wanted to take a different approach with Uvalde and Estrada decided to be one of the reporters who answered the call. He dedicated the past year to telling not just the story of the mass shooting, but what happened in the year that followed. How does a small town of only about 15,000 recover from losing the innocent lives of children? The first question I had for Ismael was: how do you get them to not only talk to you, but trust you with their stories?

Estrada worked to gain the trust of eventually what would be five Uvalde families, following them in their day-to-day lives throughout the year.  “It took some patience, and it took some persistence to get them to crack the door open to me,” said Estrada. In the beginning stages, there was not always a camera and Estrada explained  that much of the time he spent with the families was just getting to know them, whether over family dinners or other gatherings. He gained their trust and got to know their stories before approaching them with a camera in that difficult time.

It was an act of patience, an act that is admirable in an industry where we rush to every story we produce. I have found that being prompt to release pertinent information is vital in this industry; but being factually correct is even more important. More than that, when dealing with a story that is so sensitive, respect should be the utmost priority. Estrada’s approach to the Uvalde families was a display of respect and humanity that every journalist should strive for when approaching stories of this kind.

“It’s not the kind of thing you can just check in on because you don’t build the trust with the families…there needs to be an investment made to really truly understand the families and get to know them because that is getting to the heart of what this gun violence is doing in America and unless you see it on an everyday basis – you see what a smell, or a song, or a laugh or a moment or anything, can do to a family – you don’t truly understand what this does to the fabric of the families.”

There is so much you can learn about journalism in school, yet I don’t think anyone can be prepared to cover something as tragic as Uvalde. I hope Ismael’s year in Uvalde opens peoples’ eyes in the same way it has mine. It is not only an excellent display of journalism, but a lesson in humanity, integrity, respect and how we can always change our approach to tell a story with justice.

 

-30-

The Art of Navigating Fairness and Objectivity

dmoseley Journalist Profiles

by Grace Vaughn

Feature reporter Roxanne Roberts has built a strong reputation in Washington, D.C. by prioritizing fairness in her work. It is her secret to building trust not only with her readers but also the high-profile people she coversfor The Washington Post.

“Sometimes people will joke, ‘Well I hope you’re going to write a good article’ and I say, ‘I promise you I will write a fair article’, or occasionally someone would say, ‘Well that was a very generous piece’ and I say, ‘but it’s factual,’ ” Roberts said.

Though, this does not mean it’s always an easy task. Roberts recalls covering speeches delivered on the floors of the House and Senate that were “reprehensible, and yet, she remained focused on the job at hand by having a clear sense of why she was doing the story.

“My general idea was that I was representing this esteemed institution with the objective of trying to do a fair story that my editors had entrusted in me. To ask the questions I think the readers want to know, to do it thoughtfully,” she said. “Your objective should be to illuminate that person, and their ideas and try to show why they matter at any given moment in time.”

She finds ease in sticking to presenting the facts and letting readers make their own decisions about how they feel about someone or something.

“Jeff Bezos is very interested in who is reading, how long they are reading, what they are reading. Part of his genius is collecting data on his customers, and that’s the business side of it. My side of it is always that you have an obligation to be as fair as you can be with every piece of information that is available to you,” she said.

The field has evolved in many ways since Roberts first started at the paper in 1988. Navigating issues of disinformation, propaganda and social media were not topics she dealt with in the newsroom prior to the last decade.

When considering how to cover more divisive issues or people, she leans on a lesson learned during a semester in college.

“I once had a great philosophy professor who said, ‘You’re never going to win a debate unless you have a general agreement on terms because you can’t argue someone out of a belief system,’” she said.

Roberts applies this way of thinking to her reporting by approaching differences of belief with curiosity and the goal of gaining a better sense of understanding.

“If the person is also approaching it with good faith, they should not be upset if you ask questions that challenge any of those beliefs because they should be able to say, ‘well I can understand you may not share this, but this is why I believe this,’” she said. “And that can be true whether you are talking about gun control or abortion or climate change or anything else, if there’s an understanding that you don’t have to share the belief to respect the person’s position.”

Despite changes in the industry, she remains hopeful about journalism’s future.

“If you work on the assumption that people will always try to make sense of their world,” she said, “then journalism is always going to be the first interpreter of that, no matter how it gets distorted or siloed on cable or in any other ways.”

###

Remaining Professional to a Source, Where Do Journalists Draw the Line?

dmoseley Student Perspectives

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-

Both Sides Journalism: The Great Debate

dmoseley Student Perspectives

By Alyssa Gomez

Through the last four years of pursuing a degree in journalism, I have been taught many things, the most prominent being: tell both sides of the story. Though this theory may seem like a simple instruction it is something young journalists like me have to work at.

I remember being in a heated crowd in downtown Chicago when abortion rights were being taken away from women in America. It was the first story I felt as if I was covering something important; a hard-hitting breaking news story. As excited as I was, I can now look back and recognize my shortcomings that day. Because when you are face to face with the opposing side, chanting rude, nasty, and even threatening things, it is difficult to approach them with confidence and ask for their point of view…and I didn’t.

I was in that situation not long ago, and despite being thrilled to cover a hard-hitting and important story, I failed in the aspect of covering both sides. Like the world around us changing, I’m still changing too and learning every day. I may have been afraid then, but if I was thrown into that situation today, I firmly believe that I have the confidence and knowledge to confront the opposing side and get their statement, without fail. In this instance, both sides journalism was not only helpful, but absolutely necessary.

Recently in my classes the question has been debated: in what instance do we abandon both sides journalism in pursuit for the truth? More than that, are we required to tell all and every side of an issue, story etc. even if they don’t contribute to exposing the truth?

Pursuing both sides journalism becomes increasingly more difficult in today’s political climate. To remain fair when both sides are explaining their viewpoint is one thing, but to give a platform to a political party when they promote falsehoods that have been repeatedly disproven is another. When we allow our platform to be utilized to spread false information, we lose credibility and contribute to the distrust that the public has in the media. It has been debated that abandoning this practice can lead to imbalance in political reporting, leaning one way or another politically.

The idea of telling both sides of the story is simple in practice, but not when a journalist’s credibility is on the line. Their credibility is their livelihood, it is what their entire career is based upon. It is not as simple as giving one side a platform over another. Like detectives, we must provide evidence and proof to disprove falsehoods and misinformation. This requires digging and searching for facts, calling people for confirmation, and linking to your sources. It is not easy and is often extremely time consuming. But in the pursuit for honest and truthful journalism, it is more important to report the truth than it is to uphold both sides. We shouldn’t be pressured into providing a platform for lies to spread, even if that means sacrificing the “both sides’ ideal.

There is an old saying my parents have often used in our household: “There’s three sides to every story. Your version, my version, and the truth.” I will always be in search of the truth.

In conclusion, nothing these days is black and white. Journalism is facing challenges like never before. We are challenged to critically think when it is appropriate to use both sides journalism, when to abandon it, and most importantly; what will serve the public in the best way possible.

A New Roadblock for Journalism: Twitter’s Demise

dmoseley Student Perspectives

Written By Grace Vaughn

As entertaining as it can be to witness a billionaire make a bad investment, I have watched in fear for the last several months as Elon Musk’s grand plans for Twitter unfolded. His takeover has involved implementing new algorithms, embracing teetering policy practices and even restoring suspended accounts. Though, my growing concern over the subject lies in the fact that the platform has become a news source in many people’s lives.

I recall a moment in my business course last year when the professor stopped mid-lecture to ask the class where they got their news. Hands rose, each student with a similar response, “I check what’s trending on Twitter” or “My Twitter timeline”.

This, of course, is a well-known reality for my generation. Seventy four percent of Gen Z consume their daily news from social media platforms in this nation, according to the American Press Institute.

The problem that arises under Musk’s leadership is whether or not the social media app can still be a trusted place to find out what’s happening in the world. Since his purchase, Twitter has seen an increase not only in misinformation but also the amount of attention being given to these accounts. An investigation by Science Feedback concluded that 490 “superspreader” accounts gained a 44% increase in interactions since his acquisition of the social network company.

Combating the spread of false information no longer appears to be a priority at the company. Users are left to decipher the truth on their own as misleading content becomes more and more difficult to detect.

The site also established a certain level of trust among users by implementing the blue check mark. Dishing it out to politicians, journalists and other public figures, the small tick symbol appearing next to a person’s handle grew to represent credibility, but that is no longer the case.

Users of any kind can now apply and purchase verification under Musk’s new “Twitter Blue” program. Requirements to be considered are much simpler than before, including being an active account and displaying a profile photo. It is worth considering the fact that users may very well continue to correlate this familiar sign with trustworthiness and authenticity.

This leads us to the question of journalists’ role in this issue. Twitter is a pivotal resource for reporters and outlets allowing them to promote work, break stories and connect with sources. Yet, Musk’s Twitter doesn’t seem interested in protecting them or maintaining a safe space for the news.

It may be tempting for journalists to switch to an alternative app in the near future, like Mastodon, as their verifications slip away and accounts get suspended. However, the hard truth is that many people continue to turn to Twitter for information.

If this is the case, I believe we need journalists engaged on the platform. We need them pushing out reliable information. We need them fact-checking others’ content for the sake of users seeking out the truth. It feels like our responsibility to fight against the messiness of the platform for a little while longer.

###

Journalists are at risk for mental health struggles and newsrooms should consider that

dmoseley Student Perspectives

By Stephania Rodriguez

As I approach the end of my senior year as a journalism major, I look back at all the interviews I’ve done, the people I’ve met, the photographs I’ve taken, the issues I’ve covered, and the places I’ve traveled to tell a good story. There was sacrifice, as with any dream we pursue, and moments when I didn’t always feel comfortable, but I always made sure to reward myself when all the hard work was done.

At the end of every week, I have to admit that I feel physically and mentally tired, but I’ve been finding ways to step away from my job and make sure I take care of my body and I can be equipped to take on whatever assignment is next.

When I first began seriously pursuing journalism, it never crossed my mind to consider the effects that the job could have on my mental health. If I was choosing to pursue the career I loved, then certainly my mental health would be the last thing I’d need to worry about.

Though I myself do not battle with mental health issues, it’s a struggle that I’ve gotten to know firsthand. Someone that I love was diagnosed with a severe mental health disorder that makes it hard for them to do many of life’s daily tasks. Having this person in my life has given me the awareness and mindfulness that I have now about mental health, and I’ve often applied it to how I show up as a journalist.

Many journalists do in fact have mental health issues.  A research article found that the prevalence of PTSD among journalists is higher than that among the general population.

There are topics reporters cover that may inevitably cause stress and mental health strain not only for the sources they are speaking to, but on themselves as well. Some reporters cover stories that involve trauma, such as natural disasters, violence, abuse, and harassment, which can cause journalists to experienceanxiety, depression, sleep and eating disorders, burnout, trauma, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The Media Diversity Institute cited a research article that studied journalists who quit the profession.  “The professions increased demands and the industry’s digitalization played a large role in their decision to quit. According to the research’s conclusions, ‘the lack of institutional support on work-life balance and mental health paired with the institutional demands to be “all in” and always on, and the consequential lack of professional–personal life balance, led journalists to have a sense of disconnection from both their personal and professional lives.’”

There have been more initiatives in recent years that show that newsrooms are considering their reporters’ mental health. Reuters created an online resource centerfor journalists that’s full of access to information and guidance on topics like stress, burnout, trauma, and mental illness. They cite research from the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma that shows that newsroom managers play “a crucial role in promoting a healthy, resilient workplace, and that effective newsroom leadership plays a protective role for journalists exposed to stress and trauma.”

When it comes to taking care of their mental health, I believe there are some questions journalists can ask themselves about the newsroom they are working in or want to work in:

  • How does this newsroom support their reporters when it comes to their mental health?
  • What kinds of resources do they provide for addressing mental health issues?
  • Is there someone within your newsroom that you can talk to about mental health and discuss how to find solutions and balance?

It’s important for journalists who are struggling to speak up and find the help they need, but newsrooms certainly play an equally important role in navigating this issue.

 

-30-

Choose Your Heroes Wisely

dmoseley Student Perspectives

By Jacob Costello

I first saw Andrew Callaghan on the YouTube channel “All Gas No Breaks.” I was instantly intrigued by his lanky frame, wild mop of red hair, and signature ill-fitting brown suit. His early work complimented his goofy appearance. Callaghan went to beach parties, music festivals, porn conventions, NASCAR races, pretty much any place where people would be drinking and/or saying outlandish things. While I got a lot of entertainment from these zany gatherings and the characters he would find, what I really began to enjoy was his coverage of protests, demonstrations, and political events.

After a legal dispute over the ownership of “All Gas No Breaks,” Callaghan would create a new channel called “Channel Five.” I feel this marked a step into more journalistic work. He would still interview Phish fans huffing nitrous gas in the parking lot of the concert, but he also began to go to political rallies and other more serious events. Callaghan covered the War in Ukraine, the Derek Chauvin trial verdict, and many other stories that were a far cry from his humble roots of interviewing drunk college students on Bourbon Street. What I loved about his coverage is how he would interview anybody who was willing to talk to him. At every one of these locations, he would interview “normal” people, or at least as normal as you can get at a convention for people who like to dress up in fur suits.

Callaghan’s 2022 documentary “This Place Rules,” contains some of his best reporting. The documentary follows the young journalist travelling across America in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election. After the election, he begins to cover the “Stop the Steal” protests and interviews inflammatory figures like Alex Jones. Callaghan never fails to bring a human element to these stories, my favorite of which is when he spends time with a family who has completely bought into the Q Anon conspiracy. His interviews with the young children are the most impactful, who have begun to parrot the conspiracies that their parents fed to them.

Callaghan explained his journalistic style of “radical empathy” to Alina Selyukh in an interview on NPR.

“The goal of the film was to really talk to people without a pre-loaded agenda, not trying to slam dunk or find the dumbest person there and make them feel small or catch them in a lie or a contradiction. But to actually try to apply some empathy and really talk to some of these folks and figure out why it is that they feel this way,” said Callaghan.

Callaghan’s journalism reminds me a lot of Hunter S. Thompson and his gonzo journalism. They both traverse America finding unique stories that haven’t been told yet. Four months ago, I would have said Callaghan and Thompson were two of my favorite journalists. However, information came to light in January that showed a side of Callaghan that most did not know about.

Days after the release of his documentary on HBO, multiple women came forward on social media claiming Callaghan had pressured them into sex while drinking. He responded two weeks later, saying he never assaulted anyone but he apologized for his pushy behavior. He also said he knows these incidents occurred under the influence and would be committing to the 12 Step Program. That was the last the internet saw of Andrew Callaghan.

Callaghan’s talent as an interviewer and a journalist is undeniable, but his reprehensible behavior will always taint my view of him. I am skeptical if he will return to journalism, but if he does will people forgive him? Will I forgive him? I wish I had the answer.

-30-

Toeing the line: The challenge of gathering vital information while being mindful of trauma

dmoseley Journalist Profiles

By Patrick Sloan-Turner

No class can prepare you to cover a potentially dangerous scenario like a mass shooting that includes hundreds of officers and first responders, lives lost and immeasurable trauma. Handling a delicate situation like this requires tools that are only gained through on-the-job experience.

A reporter must obtain the necessary information regarding a developing story, while also letting first responders do their jobs. Hearing first-hand accounts of what has transpired is crucial, but so is showing respect to bystanders who witnessed what happened.

Former Chicago Tribune reporter Annie Sweeney knows this challenge all too well.

In what she calls the “most consequential” pieces of reporting she’s ever done, Sweeney was on the ground immediately following the July 4, 2022, mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois.

“There is a sense of, you do not want to miss the opportunity to fully absorb what’s going on,” Sweeny said. “And, importantly, not miss an opportunity to know how to follow up or connect with someone later.”

While it’s nothing like what happened in Highland Park last year, in October, I covered a breaking news scenario on the ground for the first time. Last fall, I rushed to the scene when a DePaul University student barricaded themselves in their dorm room at McCabe Hall.

I was hearing rumors that the student was threatening self-harm and rumors that they had a weapon. Other residents of the hall were gathered outside, barred from entering as a SWAT team made its way inside. Students were visibly frightened, and I couldn’t help but wonder if and how I should approach them.

Sweeney said she’s learned that while a reporter may want to hear witnesses’ accounts right away, it’s often better to make contact and give them a chance to speak in the future.

“That’s the that’s a balancing you do,” Sweeney said. “You’re saying, ‘I don’t want to miss this, I can see that this person is here and was involved and therefore might be a good source later to talk to, but I’m not going to ask them to be interviewed unless I feel like it’s an okay thing to do.’”

With other Tribune reporters, Sweeney initially reported what happened on the day of the event. In following up the story, she shifted to the role of state gun laws and how they played a part in the shooting, publishing that piece the next day.

Not until weeks and months later did Sweeney focus on the stories of those who were there that day and were directly traumatized by what took place. Sweeney said that she tries to approach victims delicately and thoughtfully, giving them space to only be a part of the story if they choose to be.

“You’re a total stranger to them, right?” Sweeney said. “It’s tough to invade somebody’s space right then and there and say, I’d like to include you in this story.”

Over the years, Sweeney said she learned some nuance in handling these conversations that allow her to show respect, while also leaving things open telling these people’s stories if they’re comfortable sharing.

“The longer I did it, [I] came to understand better ways,” she said. “You tell them, ‘Can I tell you we’re doing a story about this, and I want to be sure you have an opportunity to be part of it with whatever you’re thinking and feeling right now because I want it to be accurate.’”

In my story at McCabe Hall, I elected not to speak to these students on the record right away. In all honesty, I only refrained from speaking to them because I felt unprepared to. Going forward, I’ll remember the Sweeney method, and give them my contact information and the option of speaking to me later.

There are two types of sources we speak to: those who are seasoned veterans at speaking with reporters – like elected officials and public figures – and those who aren’t. When we’re speaking with people who likely have never been interviewed before, it’s important to remember the power we have.

The story of those directly affected by a traumatic event is important, but it is not more important than respecting the pain they’re feeling.

Give them space, and maybe, they’ll give their story.

-30-