Back in February, CBS4 (Channel 4) interviewed a woman claiming to be one of the prostitutes who worked for "Denver Players," an escort service that allegedly catered to lawyers, judges, professional athletes and other muckety-muck men.
She described orgy-like parties that took place at the ritzy Denver Club, before Denver Players was shut down by law-enforcement officials in January.
CBS4's Brian Maass showed the alleged prostitute photos of prominent men who were possible clients of Denver Players. She identified three, he told me. But Channel 4 elected not to name these men. Instead, Maass looked into the camera and pledged:
"CBS4 is not identifying the customers without the clients confirming the information or law enforcement releasing the names."
Maybe some of the Johns breathed a sigh of relief, because this means CBS4 could have a rock-solid anonymous sources and overwhelming evidence, and it still wouldn't release the names.
"If we put names out there, clearly we'd be ruining lives, reputations, families, careers, and to what end?" Maas told me, adding, "What's the news value of that?"
But journalists aren't supposed to wait for criminals to confess or for the police to release the names of suspects before they inform the public about evidence of a criminal act. And like it or not, prostitution-unlike blowing $3,000 at a strip bar-is a crime.
If a journalist has credible evidence that links someone to a crime, they should release it. Right?
Maybe Not.
Unlike CBS4, 9News News Director Patti Dennis doesn't have a consistent standard for deciding whether to report the names of Denver Players' clients, but she said the "standard will probably vary depending on the person's public profile."
"Certainly, someone who works for the people has to be held to a pretty high standard of conduct," she said.
That's why 9News reported March 7 that U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham's name and personal cell phone number were on a list of Denver Players clients. This information came from anonymous "sources" and is "indisputable," said Dennis.
Dennis refused to tell me if she has names of other men linked to Denver Players.
In deciding whether to identify the clients, without official confirmation, journalists should ask:
1. Does the petty nature of this crime matter? Yes. As Maass says, the public-interest benefits of releasing names are minimal compared to the risk, however low, that names released by a news outlet turn out to be wrong.
2. Are links to the crime, like names on a Denver Players' list, newsworthy, without further evidence? No.
3. Does the client's job matter? Yes. Journalists should hold public officials to a higher standard.
My real advice for Denver journalists is to focus their investigative powers elsewhere, and spare us interviews with prostitutes.But if reporters must swarm to the Denver Players story and they uncover major and credible evidence that a public official broke the law or is under investigation, then let us know. Otherwise, CBS4's admirable standard should carry the day. More on the story.
1 comment:
No the Media should follow the old law of protecting clients. Now we should only ID clients that the GOP want out of office or those who are against the Criminal White House policies. We have a new Justice System formed by Bush/Cheney. The White House with the help of the GOP and some Democrats have removed the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We are a New United States and people accept the changes.
Democrats even like some of the Bush policies as they told Hillary to drop out of the election. Yes we once had Leaders who allowed Americans to vote but now that's not the way we do things in America anymore. As Leahy and Pelosi said they have picked the candidate who will represent the Democratic Party, the voters don't count and aren't necessary. I wonder when Pelosi/Leahy are up for re-election would they mind a Republican saying for them to drop out the election is over without the voters having a chance to vote?
Post a Comment