How We Cover Public Safety, Policing And Criminal Justice

We at WPLN News know our reporting shapes the public’s perception of public safety, policing and criminal justice, especially in breaking news situations such as shootings and mass-casualty events. We believe words matter, and we think critically about our role.

Our practices will continue to evolve, but here are our answers to a few common questions, as of June 2021:

How do you decide what and when to report?

When there seems to be a danger to public safety, we feel an obligation as a local news outlet to report what we know as soon as possible. But in other situations, we believe in taking the time to verify what we can before we report. Sometimes that means we’re slower than other news outlets, and we believe that is OK.

When we do publish, we try to be clear about what facts we have and haven’t independently confirmed. We attribute any information that we cannot independently verify, and we sometimes decide to omit early speculations about motives. Many of our breaking news stories — both online and on the air — also include a disclaimer reminding our audience that initial reports could turn out to be wrong.

We make that statement in the interest of transparency: When news breaks, we often don’t know yet what we don’t know. But we pledge to inform our audience as new facts are uncovered.

In all our reporting, WPLN News strives to connect these incidents to the bigger picture: why they happened, how they impact our community and how similar events could be avoided in the future. News doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Our goal is to connect the dots, add historical context and shed light on a complex system.

What sources do you rely on?

Law enforcement often is the first to speak to the press when there’s been criminal activity or a threat to public safety. We listen to them, but we don’t rely solely on them — especially when a police officer is involved in the incident — just as we wouldn’t rely on a single source when covering other topics.

We talk to witnesses. We gather outside perspectives from experts and other agencies. We file public records requests for reports from the scene. We review camera footage and 911 calls, and we ask whether they match up with the law enforcement narrative.

Sometimes our fact-based reporting leads us to question official statements or even draw different conclusions. We strive to report those discrepancies in ways that are transparent to our audience.

 Why do you avoid words like “shooter” and “terrorist”?

There are several reasons.

The first is that we try to remember no person is defined by a single action or characteristic. So, across our coverage, we are using “person-first” phrases more often.

In the context of public safety and criminal justice, that means saying a person “fired a shot” or “fired multiple shots” rather than calling them “a shooter.” We’ve also found that avoiding putting labels on people causes us to be more neutral and precise in our reporting.

The second reason is that often exact facts and motivations are unknown, especially in the moments just after a news event. Declaring someone to be a “shooter” or a “terrorist” in our initial coverage suggests a level of certainty that’s often misleading.

Finally, such terms are often applied in loaded, racialized ways, as we discussed in this story. Ultimately, marginalized communities suffer the most when journalists speculate about perpetrators’ rationales.

What about words like “acts of terrorism,” “racist attacks” and “hate crimes”?

There are times when these phrases are appropriate. They are labels applied to the acts themselves, rather than the perpetrators, and they signify that those acts have broader societal impact.

They also often have greater legal significance, in the form of enhanced investigatory powers and penalties. And they have greater political and historical significance, indicating attacks on specific communities or the general public.

So we will at times label acts as hate crimes, racist attacks and acts of terrorism. But we will apply these phrases judiciously — after thinking through the ramifications as a newsroom — and when we do, we will strive to make clear to our audiences why.

Have another question?

The work of covering the news is not easy. It requires us to make judgment calls, and we’re sharing these answers to give our audience a better understanding of how we make decisions.

We welcome your feedback. Your perspective makes our coverage stronger. Contact the editors at WPLN News here.