. . . leave out the name of the site owner? Isn't who owns the lot important to the story, especially since angry neighbors claim their pleas to fence in the area went unheeded?
Plus, some people left out the name of the victim. It is a very rare circumstance when the names of victims -- or anyone, for that matter -- are left out of stories.
In American journalism, those exceptions are pretty limited to rape victims, and some juvenile criminal suspects (but the latter is hardly universal; the places I worked at pretty much usually named 'em. If they're old enough to commit a crime that's worth running in the newspaper, they're old enough to have their name in the paper, too, I suppose).
So, unless we had a truly compelling reason, we should have run the victim's name.
Names are important to stories. Names let the audience see we're dealing with real people. Names humanize what happens, shifting a story to one of statistics (two dead, etc.) to ones of actual human impact. Names matter. Let's include the, in all but the rarest of circumstances.
Plus, some people left out the name of the victim. It is a very rare circumstance when the names of victims -- or anyone, for that matter -- are left out of stories.
In American journalism, those exceptions are pretty limited to rape victims, and some juvenile criminal suspects (but the latter is hardly universal; the places I worked at pretty much usually named 'em. If they're old enough to commit a crime that's worth running in the newspaper, they're old enough to have their name in the paper, too, I suppose).
So, unless we had a truly compelling reason, we should have run the victim's name.
Names are important to stories. Names let the audience see we're dealing with real people. Names humanize what happens, shifting a story to one of statistics (two dead, etc.) to ones of actual human impact. Names matter. Let's include the, in all but the rarest of circumstances.
No comments:
Post a Comment