By Mike Cavender, RTDNA Executive Director

There’s a lesson to be learned from the issue over an ESPN headline posted on the story about Jeremy Lin and the New York Knicks' loss to New Orleans last Friday.  And it has nothing to do with creative writing.

In case you haven’t heard—the headline, “Chink In The Armor,” was paired with a photo of Lin in a story on ESPN’s mobile platforms shortly after the loss.  It was up about an hour before being pulled and changed to a different header.  But the damage was done and the widespread criticism had begun.

ESPN apologized and the now-fired employee responsible for the posting, Anthony Frederico, apologized.  No harm was ever meant, he said.  No racial motivation was ever intended, he claimed.  It was an “honest mistake” of an often-used sports cliché, Frederico told the New York Daily News.  

All true, perhaps.  But the affair points to a more insidious problem.  It is one faced by every one of us when we commit words to paper (or website) and that is the importance of understanding not just what our words mean—but how they may be seen and interpreted by those who read (or listen) to them.   Taking that step back to reflect and consider is not only right—but it’s our responsibility, as well. 

Even though the word “Chink” was used in a totally different context in this case, to some, the mere word itself conjures a hateful and pejorative image—one which reasonable people decry.  As journalists and writers, we must understand that the words we use can carry ramifications that may not be obvious at first blush. In the 24/7, multi-platform world of news these days, you may believe that stopping to think is a luxury you cannot afford.  To the contrary—it’s all the more important now.

As long-time RTDNA/F board member, Janice Gin, herself an Asian-American, said to me, “This isn’t just about being PC.  It’s about history. It’s about using words accurately and fairly and understanding all underlying meanings."

Gin, who is the Associate News Director at KTVU in San Francisco, adds, “Our job is to minimize harm while providing illumination. We should never be flip with our words, (they are) our art."

Lin, by the way, seemed unfazed by all of this.  He told ESPN that one of his goals is to be a role model for the Asian-American community.  As journalists, we should also strive to be role models in our own communities.   It can start with a better understanding of both the principles—and the practice—of diversity.

POST A COMMENT

Understanding Diversity

To this journalist, the lessons from this incident are simple.

The decades-old advice of ethics and sensitivity still applies in this age of 24/7 deadlines, increased pressure to do more with less, and the proliferation of new media platforms across which we are expected to publish.

Get it right. Take the necessary time to check everything you do—not only for accuracy, fairness and balance—but for political correctness , too (not a bad phrase in my vocabulary BTW).

One of the goals of diversity in the newsroom should be expanded opportunity to cover previously unreported persons and issues. That’s why we see more and better coverage of health, education, and family issues now that we have new voices in our newsrooms.

Likewise, diversity should mean we’re more sensitive to how different segments of our audience respond to traditional stories such as our focus and use of language—and how our audience reacts to our expanded coverage as well.

Citizen journalism is a response to our failure to address many of these issues.

In this instance basic reporting values would have meant an accurate story of course. But newsroom diversity and sensitivity would have tagged this problem before it was published. Someone should have asked…does this story/headline make sense? Is there anything wrong with it?

Again, get it right!

Diversity

I agree with the comments about journalists being careful with their use of loaded words.
But let us be honest. All too often, many journalists use the term right-wing to demonize a conservative point-of-view with which they disagree. Seldom do we see/hear the term left-wing to describe a liberal point of view.