Shots Across The Bow: Attention to Detail, and Hasty Conclusions

September 12, 2007

Attention to Detail, and Hasty Conclusions

Russ McBee analyzes another KNS article on the early stages of the trial, and notes some interesting wording.

Owings and Stackhouse are representing County Commission in the suit. The News Sentinel article includes three sentences which paraphrase (but never directly quote) their remarks. Those three sentences use the verbs "complained" (twice) and "fretted" to characterize arguments made by Owings and Stackhouse. However, when quoting the paper's attorney, Richard Hollow, the article uses the neutral verb "said" (twice). Chancellor Daryl Fansler, who's hearing the case, is quoted using the word "said" (twice) and "noted" (twice).

These may seem like minor quibbles, but how we say something is at least as important as what we say, and a good wordsmith will take advantage of that, choosing words that create reactions deeper than what a surface reading would reveal. However, the act of writing is as much art as it is science, and many of the word choices we make are made at that same deeper level. To note these choices and immediately infer a conscious intent is unwarranted without additional information.

You could argue that it is clear that the KNS has a stake in the outcome of the trial, and that lends credence to the idea that the coloration of the story is intentional. However, you also have to take into account that the publisher of the paper went out of his way to invite additional scrutiny,an act which argues against an intentional attempt to "shape the story."

Given the facts of the story, that County Commissioners have already said they discussed the appointment process in private, it is not too hard to imagine that the reporter has already formed an opinion on the case, and allowing that opinion to color her coverage. But it's too much of a stretch to get from there to inferring that the KNS is intentionally altering their coverage.

Russ's observations are spot-on; I'm not as sure about his conclusions.

Posted by Rich at September 12, 2007 11:28 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Rich, although it might appear that I've inferred a deliberate attempt by the KNS to shape the story, I'm specifically trying not to make that implication.

I did end that post with the phrase "an emerging attempt to shape the story," which probably leaves the impression that I've inferred a deliberate bias. I don't really mean it that way; perhaps I should have said, "an emerging tendency to shape the story" instead.

I'm perfectly willing to ascribe any bias in the KNS coverage to subconscious reaction, and I'm trying my best to avoid drawing any conclusions about motives or intent.

Like you said in another post, you and I are placing every word of the coverage under a microscope, and that kind of scrutiny is bound to result in unintended inferences. I apologize for leaving an unfair impression.

I sure wouldn't want to be in Jamie Satterfield's shoes right now; that kind of scrutiny would be maddening. It's a good thing I'm not a journalist. ;-)

Posted by: Russ on September 13, 2007 10:57 AM