Journalists, and their abuses of trust

The past couple of weeks have marked a low point for American journalism. Highly publicized accounts of "journalistic fraud" by a New York Times reporter have left honorable and ethical reporters and editors -- most of them strive to be honorable and ethical -- scratching their heads.

There are two points worthy of further consideration in this journalistic quagmire. One is an observation, and the other is a question. First, the observation.

American freedoms frequently test logic and common sense. We are guaranteed the right to complain about our government even when the basis of our gripe is groundless. We are protected when we want to don white hoods and hold rallies in public places while we shout racial epithets, even if such actions are odious and dangerous. We are free to trust in God and to put in our wallets currency that bears the words "In God We Trust" but are forbidden to display the Ten Commandments in legislative chambers where daily deliberations open with a chaplain's prayer.

Americans discovered in 2001 that unfettered freedom can exact a costly price at the hands of foreign terrorists.

At the very heart of our cherished freedoms is the right to express ourselves freely, but we hold "the press" -- newspapers, magazines, radio and TV broadcasts -- to higher standard of accuracy and fairness while forking over millions of dollars a year for supermarket tabloids and access to Web sites whose content can be malicious as well as sheer fabrication.

From time to time, "the press" exceeds the boundaries of ethical standards, constitutional protection and society's expectations. The latest example is Jayson Blair, a reporter whose failures have been documented in excruciating detail by his former employer, The New York Times.

On the same day the Times was publishing its detailed report about Blair, a man named Stephen Glass was being interviewed on "60 Minutes." Glass was fired in 1998 from the New Republic, a Washington weekly, after making up dozens of stories. Now he has written a book -- fiction, by the way -- described as a memoir that has spawned a movie. In his TV interview, Glass was candid about his abuse of the journalistic freedom he enjoyed. He issued something of an apology.

Now for the question.

Why did it take The New York Times so long to put a stop to Blair's indiscretions? The newspaper's editors offered disclaimers that were weak at best. And one can only wonder why CBS would aid and abet the personal fortune of Glass, who stands to profit handsomely from his book deal and the attendant publicity accommodatingly offered by "60 Minutes."

Journalistic fraud is a disease that infects every publication to one degree or another at one time or another, including the Southeast Missourian. It is a scourge that must be confronted far too often in far too many ways. Information outlets -- the ones that take seriously the trust that is the price of a free press -- do everything in their power to prevent such abuses.

It is easy to wonder, in the case of Blair and Glass, if the Times and CBS did enough.