Newsrooms Consider Policies, Post Blair

By: Joe Strupp As The New York Times continues to explain the months of improper behavior by Jayson Blair, a 27-year-old who rose to a coveted national reporting gig in less than five years despite having no college degree and a reputation for inaccuracies and mistakes, newspapers around the country are reacting swiftly to the incident with internal reviews of their own polices, as well as reminders to staff to check anything that doesn't look right.

"We are also going to examine our ethics policy," Greg Moore, editor of the Denver Post, told E&P. "We will come up with a new comprehensive policy and have a continuing conversation about this." The Post also reviewed the paper's archives for any Jayson Blair stories that the paper might have re-printed in recent months. Moore said the paper found four Blair stories that had accuracy problems, and ran a story Monday telling readers about them.

At the Detroit Free Press, editors found five Blair articles, including one that the Times had cited as including fabrications. The Free Press has published a box explaining that story and how it had been misleading.

Most other newspaper editors who spoke with E&P acknowledged that the Blair controversy had sparked them to review existing procedures to weed out inaccuracies and plagiarism. "You have to make sure you have appropriate checks and balances in place," said Julia Wallace, editor of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, which began to track corrections more closely last year with a new policy that includes a review of corrections every three months. "I believe we have a lot of safeguards."

Several editors have also ordered editorial staffers to read and save the entire Times report on Blair, saying this was a good way to handle the problem -- although many marveled at the lengths Blair could go in his deceit without being caught sooner.

Executive Editor Leonard Downie, Jr. of The Washington Post and Editor John Carroll of the Los Angeles Times declined to comment on the Blair matter or any action their papers might have taken in response. Greg Moore, who was managing editor at the Boston Globe when Blair interned there, refused to comment on that experience.

Some of the newspaper editors contacted by E&P sympathized with the Times' plight, stressing that any editor could be duped by a dishonest reporter, but others criticized the "paper of record" for missing many warning signs and not reacting quickly enough to red flags. "You have to look out for patterns," said Tommy Miller, managing editor of the Houston Chronicle, who was surprised that Blair could not only submit false expense reports, but go unnoticed when he failed to submit any expense reports for numerous trips he was supposed to have taken. "I would like to think it would have been noticed."

Carole Leigh Hutton, executive editor of the Detroit Free Press, agreed. "Perhaps the bigness of The New York Times came back to haunt them," she said. "If they had an ombudsman, it may have been easier for the problems to be aggregated and make a greater impression." Hutton said policies that require editors to review all expense reports and to know the names of anonymous sources, which her paper has, might have exposed Blair's misdeeds earlier.

But others, such as Moore, said any paper could have suffered a similar fate. "There but for the grace of God....," Moore said. "It certainly scares you; this whole enterprise is based on trust." Phil Bronstein, editor of the San Francisco Chronicle, agreed. "This kind of thing will happen," Brosntein. "It should be a cautionary tale about pushing people too fast and too hard." He added: "I can imagine someone making something up here and we don't know it. I can't imagine it happening over and over again."

Bill Marimow, editor of The Sun in Baltimore, said one particular story Blair apparently fabricated related to the Washington, D.C.-area sniper case should have sparked stronger scrutiny by his superiors. "It is very hard to second guess, but that story should have raised a red flag and editors should have questioned him," Marimow said about the Oct. 2002 article that falsely reported a dispute between federal and local investigators over the interrogation of sniper suspect John Muhammad and drew severe criticism from law enforcement officials. "My hunch is they would have discovered he fabricated information."

Although none of the editors interviewed by E&P had experienced a situation similar to the depths of Blair's deceit, nearly all admitted to having been faced with reporters who lied or fabricated information. "I've experienced quite a bit," said Moore, who had to deal with three high-profile cases involving columnists Mike Barnicle, Patricia Smith and Jeff Jacoby during his 16 years at The Boston Globe. Marimow cited two 1999 incidents that resulted in the firing of staffers. In one case, a music critic lifted passages from an opera guide for a review of a local production, while the other involved a reporter fabricating quotes for an obituary. "We try to hire people who have a track record of accuracy," he said when asked how the paper prevents such abuse. "And when a reader raises a question, we investigate."

Editors declined to blame race for any of the controversy, shooting down speculation that Blair might have been given extra chances because he is black or that his downfall might hurt ongoing diversity efforts. "That is sort of an easy excuse," said Wallace.