Irony aside, most of the article just served to make me want to take the interns, their supervisor, and the ABC execs firmly by the ears and give them MY tour of a research reactor.
By now Eric and others have disputed most of the erroneous details of the story and have called out the powers-that-be at ABC.
But I want to take issue with the interns. The AP story says
Ross said it wasn't a case of the interns being taught "gotcha" journalism instead of investigative journalism. The students did a great deal of research into the nuclear programs before going to the universities, he said.Yet, Dana Hughes, a journalism student at Columbia University, is quoted as saying that if all it took to get into facilities was talking like a student or flirting
some people could find that a questionable line of defenseYes, I suppose that many people who are unaware of the vast operational and material differences between a commerical plant and a research facility would question the security. However, any honest research into the matter would have revealed that most university reactors do grant tours rather liberally with or without flirting or a student ID. Further research would clearly demonstrate the reason such tours are allowed, and that is that with minimal precautions (like not allowing bags into the area around the reactor) there really isn't anything a tourist can do to seriously jeopardize the security of the material or the safety of the public.
But that's the point, isn't it?
A journalist with integrity would have sought to educate the average American on this little known subject. But who needs integrity when a little yellow journalism will get you a cushy new job at ABC News?
0 comments:
Post a Comment