Journalism-ethics expert Kenny Irby, of the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, has a problem with [Moe Howard]Quiet Numbskulls! I’m broadcasting[/Moe Howard] Mr. Fine billing his interviewers by claiming there’s a big distinction between a photojournalist who makes a salary (taking a snapshot of Mr. Fine covered in soot) for recording history, and the subject of the photograph asking to be compensated for his time recounting his tale.
My initial discomfort with Mr. Fine’s fee (the tacky $911 rate notwithstanding) was quickly overridden by the hypocrisy that permeates the fourth estate and, on the bigger picture, society in general. Instead of questioning the ethics of the fee, perhaps the questions should be: [ol][li]Since when was, “Information in a free society and democracy…free"? Nothing’s free, the NY Times costs 75¢ and the tabloids 50¢[]How many hours do you expect people to donate to the media to recount their tales?[]Is their really a difference between paying free-lance photo journalists, reporters or videogrophers and eyewitnesses to a story?[]Didn’t CNN pay Afghani insiders recently for those “Al-Queda” tapes?[]Are journalists in the UK unethical where paying for a story is common practice?[]Don’t journalists and other professions (like those in the legal system) pay for expert and/or eyewitness testimony?[]Is the fee ($500/hour) that outrageously priced to cause all this static?[]Isn’t Guiliani out making huge speaking fees directly off the back of his 9/11 fame?[]What about the speaking fees charged by ex-presidents, politicians, opinion makers and other famous people?[/ol][/li]
Information is a market commodity. If Edward Fine wants a few bucks for his time, that’s just fine with me.
I’ve got to agree. The journalists are making money, as are the corporations that the they work for. Mr. Fine is entitled to compensation for his time.
However, if it were me, I would be willing to give the story for free.
Fortunately, I don’t have a story to tell from September 11, 2001.
That said, I can comprehnd Mr. Fine’s position. Seen from the point of view that an interview takes time out of his day that he could have used for something else, yes he is entitled to compensation. The way I read it, he has been hounded by the press and has taken to charging in order keep the reporters away. Damned good idea. If they want to be so pushy, let 'em pay.
Personally, I wouldn’t talk to the reporters at all. Pay or no pay. As an eyewitness directly after the event, I would probably answer questions or offer observations freely (not referring to monetary freedom.) After the fact, I would tell the reporters that I didn’t want to talk to them - and tell persistent ones to get stuffed.
I am very much a private person and don’t consider it proper for reporters to dig into anyone’s private thoughts and feelings. A pushy reporter can just take what he gets - be it a bill or a rude comment.
I have found that the information wants to be free crowd really mean. “You worked really hard to figure that out and I don’t want to work hard to figure that out so why don’t you just tell me.”
What’s the big deal? Nobody is forced to pay him for his story. Were these same groups outraged that CNN paid $10,000(?) for some al-Qaeda videotapes (and therefore have actually given money to the terrorists, which I think means they are now officially part of the Axis of Evil, although Aaron Brown assured viewers that they “had to trust” CNN (or words to that effect) that the terrorists hadn’t received any of the money…)
Couldn’t agree more. A profit making organization wants to use the story as a product in their business. If he were selling newsprint they would pay him without any question.
This is pretty simple. They want his story from him so that they can blare it around to sell papers. He sets a rather minor barrier in their way (which seems smart when vultures are constantly pestering you for information so as to exploit your experiences), and they not only cry bloody murder, but they have the audacity to drag his name though the mud. That’s nothing but despicable.
WTF? By “public property” does he mean “Multi-national media conglomerate property”? This is one of the best examples of the astounding arrogance of the American Media Establishment I have ever seen.
Unless this is:
Ah, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha …
I agree completely. I’ll be looking for my free newspaper in the morning, and I’m shredding my cable and internet access bills as we speak.
Journalists shouldn’t pay sources for news, but does this qualify as ‘news’? To me, it’s just a human interest story. It’s being offered as entertainment to sell papers, not as news. The fact that the story is true doesn’t change that.
Plus, I get the feeling this guy is just tired of recounting the story. His time, like our time, is valuable to him. The reporter is gonna profit from it, why not the guy telling the tale?
I missed this on the first pass: He’s already told his story many times for free apparently, so it’s already a matter of public record: even the original Post story admits that (though it then tries to denigrate him via association by only naming the London Mirror, and then calling it anti-American, as if to attack him by vague association). That make their attack on him even more ridiculous.
The problem I see in having journalists, media operatives, et al. paying sources for news is the crackpot factor.
If cash for news was standard practice, I’m sure there’d be a sharp increase in:
People doing stupid / dangerous things to “manufacture” their own story. (Like those morons who chase tornadoes with video camerason a larger scale…Not a big deal, let em kill themselves).
Frauds and liars making up their own versions of stories they weren’t even witness to. (Talk about making more of a nightmare out of an editor’s / fact checker’s job).
Bidding wars between rival news organizations (We’d be going from National Enquirer vs. The Globe to Time vs. Newsweek)
Leaks (DC already leaks like a seive, imagine how many bureaucrats would start leaking if there was a cash incentive)
I think the point is that the experience of one individual isn’t the news. The news is that hijacked planes crashed into the WTC and the towers collapsed with great loss of life. A plane crashed into the Pentagon with more lives lost and another hijacked plane crashed in PA apparently when the passengers struck back at the hijackers. The president was flown around in AF 1 and VP Cheney disappeared. That’s news to me.
How John Doe made his way from the 77th floor of tower x through smoke, debris, panic etc. isn’t news. At least not to me.
And there are already bidding wars among outlets and there are manufactured “stories” with people doing stupid things (Survivor comes to mind).
