Scheduled to die, killer says he's better than most on death row. Alan Turner, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
It's the typical story, guy who committed hideous murder(s) given shade because of mental issues/bad representation/faulty trials or (in this case) all of the above. He's (and it's usually a he) then presented in the most sympathetic manner possible in keeping with the Chronicle's editorial position against the death penalty.
It's a classic case of a newspaper's editorial advocacy bleeding over into it's so-called "hard news" coverage and, under the current Houston Chronicle leadership, it is happening more and more often. Some reporters for the Chronicle clearly relish the opportunity to inject their personal beliefs into the stories, some do not. The latter are the beat and Sr. reporters that I consider to still be the good guys still working at the newly minted News Fortress on I-69.
Today however it seems a little bit worse. Because now the Chronicle is all but admitting that their death-row reporting is coming directly from an anti-death penalty advocacy group.
 |
| Image from a slide-show within the story. |
From their "about" page:
Not that I necessarily disagree with them, on the need for criminal justice reform, but I do disagree with a so-called news organization all but outsourcing their criminal justice reporting to what is admittedly an advocacy group.The Marshall Project will practice open-minded, fact-based journalism without fear or favor. Our editor, Bill Keller, has assembled a first-class team of reporters and editors dedicated to excellence, nonpartisan reporting, and innovation. We are a journalism organization because we think that journalism, done honestly and well, has infinite power to drive change. One need only look to the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements to appreciate how important journalists were in shaping public opinion. We do not need to be strident or ideological or selective in our use of facts . When the truth is as disturbing as it was in the segregated South, or in Vietnam, or today's prisons and courts, truthful reporting can have a powerful impact. We will explore what is working as well as what is broken, and where the potential exists for meaningful reform. Our commentary section will be written by individuals whose views encompass a broad range of perspectives. Our board of advisers, for example, includes both the inspirational civil rights lawyer Bryan Stevenson from the Equal Justice Initiative, and the conservative thinker Marc Levin from Right on Crime, both of whom have devoted their careers to making our system more humane and effective.Being nonpartisan is not the same as being neutral. We approach the issue with the view — shared by a growing number of conservatives and liberals — that our system needs serious rethinking. Thank you for your interest in The Marshall Project, and please do not hesitate to tell us what you think.
The Marshall project is up-front and honest about their point of view and what they are trying to do with their "reporting". By using them as a source for their reporting on Texas death-row inmates, and having a Sr. Chronicle reporter write the story with no disclosure within the body of the same, the Houston Chronicle leadership is not.
If the Chronicle is willing to outsource (at least the research) for its criminal justice reporting then what else are they willing to do? Are we getting reporting on Houston government that's written by Janice "the Terrible" Evans? How about reporting on the Houston Port that's being edited by the Port Authority itself?
Again, I don't blame the reporters for this, I blame the people in charge of the editorial process. In short, I blame the editors, especially those in Sr. leadership.
We've known for a long time that the Chronicle cannot be trusted on stories relating to State politics, climate change or Houston regional transportation, and that on urban development issues they were weak we well. What we probably didn't realize was just how far the influence went, and how willing the Chronicle is to seemingly give up editorial control to groups with agendas in which they are in general agreement.
Then again, based on the almost 12 year old Chronicle rail memo, the increase in prevalence of 'newsish' blogs used to forward ideas and the unskeptical acceptance of quotes from institutional sources maybe this shouldn't have surprised us at all?
It appears that the more things change at Houston's former newspaper of record, the more they stay the same.
