Determination 107: Jackie Schweitz, MCCL v. KTCA Newsnight Minnesota
Schwietz complained that the station acted unethically by violating a promise to her about the nature of a piece they produced about her for which she granted an interview.
Attending were Jackie Schwietz, executive director of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL), Mary Cracraft, MCCL communications director, and Marice Rosenberg, MCCL vice president. Representing KTCA’s Newsnight Minnesota were Ken Stone, executive producer, and Cathy Wurzer, reporter.
Background: Schwietz was contacted by Cathy Wurzer and asked to give an interview for a personality profile piece. She was told it would be a one-on-one interview and that similar ones had been done with Archbishop Roach and businessman Jeno Paulucci. She insisted that she be the only one interviewed and was assured that she would be. On the day of the interview Wurzer was on jury duty and another reporter, Maureen Willenbring, conducted the interview.
KTCA aired promos before the program and Schwietz learned that other people had indeed been interviewed. She called Stone to complain; he told her they intended to run an introductory piece to put her interview in context. She then asked that her interview be withdrawn. He refused to do so.
When the program aired, a three-minute introduction showed several legislators talking about Schwietz’s role as a lobbyist at the recent state legislative session. Ken Stone then said that Schwietz didn’t want people to see her interview but KTCA thought it was important, and then Schwietz’s interview followed (6 minutes). Stone didn’t say that Schwietz had requested the interview not air because she felt the station had reneged on its promise to her.
Response of the news organization: KTCA denied that any promise was broken because no promise was made about what would be aired in the rest of the program.
Discussion: There was no disagreement between the parties that Schwietz had been told her interview would be a one-on-one piece. The disagreement concerns the introductory piece, which Schwietz contends violated the agreement and which Stone says is another piece entirely and therefore did not violate the agreement.
After the interview was recorded the station decided it needed a background piece to put Schwietz’s comments into perspective and to provide context. The background focused on the previous legislative session, with several pro-life legislators expressing dismay at Schwietz’s behavior and at the tactics of the MCCL toward them. MCCL accused them of compromising pro-life positions to help overhaul the MinnesotaCare program. MCCL strategy was to stall the overhaul until pro-life strategies had been incorporated into it.
Council members asked Wurzer about the promise she made to Schwietz before the interview. Wurzer said they casually agreed to do a half-hour interview, and she specified some subjects of discussion. Schwietz said she never takes a conversation with a reporter casually or off the record. She said she was reluctant to grant an interview because in the past such interviews had turned out not to be personal but political. She said she agreed to the interview with Wurzer because she received much reassurance and believed they had a firm agreement.
When asked if she was expecting special treatment, Schwietz said she was not, that she was told this was how all previous pieces had been done. Schwietz said that, as the source agreeing to do an interview, it was her prerogative to set ground rules. Stone agreed that sometimes sources lay down very strict ground rules and cited the example of a Minneapolis police officer and the major who would not appear in the same room together.
Council members asked about the format of previous pieces. Stone said that Schwietz’s interview was only the third such piece done and that the two that had been mentioned to her (Roach and Paulucci) had not actually been done. Neither of the two pieces done before Schwietz’s had background, though two since have had background in the form of an anchorperson’s scripted introduction to provide context. Wurzer said, “We’ve never used footage to introduce these pieces in the past.”
Media member Maureen Reeder asked Wurzer if she felt she had kept her promise. Wurzer said she was uncomfortable because Schwietz was upset and that she (Wurzer) had not been aware of the background piece before it aired.
Stone said that the decision to provide context was the news editor’s decision, not the reporter’s and he repeated that no promise had been made that context wouldn’t be provided elsewhere in the program. He believed that context on the legislative session was needed to demonstrate the news value of the profile. When asked if he authorized reporters to make promises, Stone said there is no formal policy, but it is understood that all promises must be cleared with him. “If a promise is made, even if it was a bad judgment, that promise is kept.”
Broadcast media members Reeder and Trish Van Pilsum told the Council that a lot of bargaining is sometimes needed to satisfy both a source and a news director. They sympathized with Wurzer that sometimes the treatment of a story changes and the source isn’t happy. Media member John Kostouros pointed out that one way to deal with a story that is changing is to contact the source and explain.
Van Pilsum suggested that an anchorperson’s introduction would have upheld the spirit of the promise. Schwietz said that she could see that such a set-up might be needed and had said that was okay.
Van Pilsum said that she found the background piece to be necessary: “To do less would have been irresponsible and incomplete.” Media member Kate Stanley, an editorial writer for the Star Tribune, called the piece excellent journalism and called the backgrounder the broadcast equivalent of a headline and photo caption. She said she learned a lot about Schwietz and gained respect for her.
Stanley asked Schwietz if she was unhappy with anything said during her interview and Schwietz said she was not. Then what harm, Stanley asked, had been done? “It harmed the integrity of the station,” said Schwietz. “I’m going to be extremely careful in the future. I probably won’t ever participate in one again.”
John Seltzer, public member, said he believed Schwietz had a promise and an expectation. “I’ve learned here that what we’re talking about is a moving target. That you don’t know what the story’s going to be.” He questioned whether reporters can even make promises, and he advised sources: “When you do grant interviews, it is at your own peril.”
Van Pilsum said, “I would hate to have people thinking that they have to talk to a reporter at their own peril. But the media, at their own peril as well, characterize their stories [to get sources to talk]. The harm is to the trust level.”
Stanley urged the station to be vigilant when it makes promises, but Seltzer countered that it seemed impossible to make promises regarding a moving target. Reeder said it is the reporter’s obligation to say he or she can’t make certain promises so sources are not misled. Seltzer pointed out the difficulty for a reporter in trying to build a trusting relationship with a source and then undercutting that trust by acknowledging that they may not be able to keep their word and that a story might change.
Determination 1: The Council voted to deny the complaint that KTCA had acted unethically by violating a promise. A majority of members agreed that there had been misunderstandings but felt that the background information was reasonable and that no promise had been broken.
Concurring: Amaris, Denny, Hoben, Kostouros, Peterson, Pumarlo, Reeder, Smith, Stanley, Van Pilsum
Dissenting: Sellers
Abstaining: Anderson (chair), LeGrand, Seltzer
Determination 2: The Council chose to consider whether KTCA violated an understanding with a news source, a complaint that did not reach the level of unethical conduct, but was unfair. The Council denied this complaint as well.
Concurring: Denny, Hoben, Kostouros, Peterson, Pumarlo, Smith, Stanley, Van Pilsum
Dissenting: Amaris, LeGrand, Reeder, Seltzer
Abstaining: Anderson (chair), Sellers
Tags: KTCA Newsnight Minnesota