In a subdivision near Oglethorpe University, Elizabeth Rehkopf’s day begins much like it has for the past 41 years, ever since she moved here from Tennessee: She starts the morning with a cup of coffee and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
“I wouldn’t know what to do if I didn’t get the paper,” Rehkopf, 88, tells me one afternoon, not too long before her weekly bridge gathering. “I start in the morning. It might take me all day, but I get everything looked at.”
These days, she’s looking at us carefully. So are many of our readers, whether they’re young or old, Republican or Democrat, in-towners or suburbanites. Above all else, Rehkopf and others expect coverage that is balanced and fair and represents multiple points of view.
All of which gets to the conversation Rehkopf and I had that afternoon. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney had just come to town for a reception, raising more than $3 million. Why, Rehkopf asked me, had we done so little with Romney’s visit? She was convinced that if President Barack Obama had been here, we would have done more.
A few things struck me about our chat. First, Rehkopf was so moved that she picked up the phone and called us. It marked the first time she had contacted the newspaper in the four decades she’s been a customer. That call reminded me of how our decisions can strike a nerve.
With the presidential election upon us, readers will be watching us more closely than ever before. We know that bias can taint our news coverage, and we take those concerns seriously.
Each morning, with readers still perusing that day’s paper, editors gather to begin planning the next day’s editions. As part of that discussion, we spend quite a bit of time trying to assess how we did, and bias is a big part of that conversation.
In our stories, did we play one side’s argument higher than another? Did both sides get equal treatment? Did we present all sides of the issue?
What about our headlines? Did they take a point of view? Were both sides reflected?
We also discuss what we’ve heard from readers.
Take, for example, the recent election in Wisconsin, in which Scott Walker, a Republican, became the first U.S. governor to keep his seat in a recall election.
Some readers thought we purposely underplayed the story. “The article was not the main headline and should have been,” one reader wrote. “You better believe it would have been if the Democrats prevailed.”
We know readers value local stories, and on the day of that Wisconsin vote, we had two strong local stories: One raised serious questions about the oversight of charter schools; another examined the salary of the CEO of the Atlanta Housing Authority.
So the Wisconsin story ended up farther down on the page than some readers might have liked. That decision was made earlier in the day, long before we knew the outcome of the election, and politics played no part in our decision.
Even so, hearing from readers helps improve our coverage.
In the instance of the Wisconsin election, we kept those comments in mind as we looked for a follow-up story that examined the outcome — and the tough questions it raised for the president and for Democrats across the country.
It’s why, when Obama and Romney delivered separate economic addresses in Ohio, we deliberately ran their photos side-by-side, giving equal weight to both of their main points.
It’s why, when the president (whether Republican or Democrat) delivers a State of the Union address, we run the rebuttal from the opposing party on the front page.
It’s why, when the jobless rate drops or rises, when the Dow sinks or soars, when home prices show signs of improvement or tumble, those stories find a home on our front page. That’s because we know the economy will shape this year’s election — and our readers care deeply about that issue.
We certainly don’t want anyone to think we overlooked a story because it reflected badly on the president, or worse, that we overplayed a story because we wanted to trumpet the administration’s accomplishments.
As we march toward November’s elections, we’ll keep all of this in mind. That’s not to say we’ll always get it right. When we don’t, we look forward to hearing from readers, such as Rehkopf.
Because, as she told me that afternoon, “I’ll be watching.”
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution wants to explain openly to readers what we do and why. Discuss this column and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s coverage of other areas at editor Kevin Riley’s Facebook page,
About the Author
