The tone of a news story

One word or phrase can change everything [View this email online]( [NPR Public Editor by Poynter's Kelly McBride]( There’s an artful technique to inserting a single word or phrase in a sentence that changes the tone of a news story. Done well, news stories become more interesting and accessible. Done poorly, the extra words telegraph a bias. Sometimes that bias is inadvertent. Sometimes that bias is intended. NPR readers wrote to us about two such instances. Several people questioned the newsworthiness of a story about a police document confirming that Elizabeth Holmes reported she was raped in college, as well as the insertion of the word “allegedly,” which conveyed doubt about the veracity of her report. In another story about good economic news, one reader saw the phrase “believe it or not” in the headline and wondered if the journalist who wrote it was being a bit too cynical. Finally, we finish out this week with the weather. News consumers generally devour dramatic weather stories. If you’ve ever wondered why your particular dramatic weather didn’t make the national news, (and if you live anywhere but the East Coast, you’ve likely wondered that) you’re not alone. Keep on reading and you’ll have the answer. Here are a few quotes from the Public Editor's inbox that resonated with us. Letters are edited for length and clarity. You can share your questions and concerns with us through the [NPR Contact page](. Why say ‘allegedly’ in a story about a sexual assault report? Audience members questioned both whether [a story on]( Elizabeth Holmes reporting a sexual assault in college was even newsworthy and the language that was used in the piece. Jarrett Terrill writes: I don't think very highly of NPR pushing an assault reported by Elizabeth Holmes (way back in college) on the front page of the website. … The newsworthy thing about Ms. Holmes is the recent criminal charges that have been leveled against her regarding Theranos. Although I understand that she mentioned it in the context of her recent trial, I think NPR has done their job by simply confirming that the report was indeed made. Joanna Hecht writes: The homepage in my NPR app this morning included the headline “Elizabeth Holmes reported sexual assault at Stanford in 2003, documents show,” [and] the synopsis included the phrase “Holmes reported to local authorities that she was allegedly assaulted.” I am skeptical that Holmes told authorities her assault was alleged. While I understand the obligation to report that the allegation is not confirmed, this feels like bending over backwards to cast doubt upon a story that represents an extremely common experience of college women. Elizabeth Holmes said she was raped as a student at Stanford during testimony at her recent trial, in which she was [convicted]( of defrauding investors in Theranos’ blood-testing technology. Bobby Allyn, a tech reporter for NPR, covered Holmes’ trial and reported this story. We talked to him about the report. “That was the first time she ever spoke to [the rape at Stanford] publicly. She described it as being a very traumatic and transformative event in her life, and that ended up being a part of her defense,” Allyn said. He and his editors felt the story had inherent news value because of the context it had within a high-profile case. It also corrected inaccurate information from other media (a [CNBC story]( published as the trial was still ongoing said police agencies had no record of a sexual assault report made by Holmes). NPR’s story was published post-trial because obtaining the document from the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office to prove Holmes had reported being sexually assaulted took time, involving NPR’s lawyers pushing for the release of the record after the sheriff’s office initially denied the request. “I did the story the day I got the document because I just wanted to get it out there,” Allyn said. It makes sense to get the story out as quickly as possible after the end of the trial. The police report added vital context to the information. Laura Palumbo, communications director for the National Sexual Violence Resource Center, told us the effects of experiencing sexual assault that Holmes described is similar to other sexual assault survivors. “What [Holmes] was reflecting is kind of wanting to have power and control in her life after sexual assault and this is something that we actually hear very commonly from survivors. Whether or not that should have weight in people’s questions of morality that were at stake in the [Theranos] case — that is all still very complex. But it’s very humanizing,” Palumbo said. While Allyn defended his use of “alleged” and “allegedly” as standard legal reporting, [best practices]( around reporting on sexual assault suggest the terms were unnecessary in this news story. “If somebody makes an allegation, it’s just that: an allegation. You must say ‘alleged,’” Allyn said. In an email, he further clarified, “Elizabeth Holmes is a convicted felon, someone who’s convicted of lying over many years to investors. Should we assume that she did not have credibility while she was a student at Stanford and when she reported this incident? I don’t know. But I saw my job with this story to simply report on the public document.” NPR Managing Editor for Standards and Practices Tony Cavin backed Allyn up. “Bobby, his editor and I all feel that in this case he used [alleged] to describe as best one could what had happened, that Holmes had alleged she was raped, there was a police report which said ‘alleged,’ there was no arrest and no conviction,” Cavin wrote in an email. “Treating people fairly does not mean we can report an allegation as fact. In this case, I believe the language we used was appropriate.” Here, we disagree. In crime reporting, the words “alleged” and “allegedly” are most often applied to a suspect who has not been convicted. Applying the terms to Holmes’ report of rape conveys doubt about whether the assault really happened. That’s a habit that journalists have been trying to get away from for the last two decades when covering reports of sexual assault, because it’s a standard that’s not applied to any other crime report. If we were writing about a victim who reported a robbery to police, we would not refer to it as “the alleged robbery” unless we were naming a suspect. Certainly Holmes’ overall credibility is in question. However, there’s no evidence to suggest her report in 2003 was fabricated. The harm caused goes beyond Holmes. [An American is sexually assaulted every 68 seconds]( and most of those assaults will not be reported to law enforcement. Victims often fear that they won’t be believed and wording like this reinforces that belief. This story could have simply said documents showed Holmes reported being raped. The word “allegedly” in the story teaser sentence — “Holmes reported to local authorities that she was allegedly assaulted ...” — was unnecessary. In fact “alleged” didn’t need to be in the story at all, let alone six times. “Words that we use when we’re talking about sexual harassment, assault and abuse matter so much,” Palumbo said. “Although we’ve seen this great increased attention to sexual harassment, assault and abuse through the MeToo movement and the many survivors who have come forward, we actually do still need to be working to change the language that we use on a daily basis and how that may consciously and unconsciously reinforce things like victim blaming, or the disbelief of sexual assault survivors.” This story added to our understanding of Holmes and established more facts about the claims she made in her defense. Regardless of her conviction on the criminal fraud charges, the victim-doubting language was unfortunate and unnecessary. — Emily Barske Does ‘believe it or not’ wording undermine economic reporting? Eddie Roth writes: I just read a NPR [news story with this headline]( “Believe it or not, the economy grew last year at the fastest pace since 1984.” Do we have reason to not believe what you are reporting? Do you think construction of a headline in this manner reinforces public sense of press cynicism and reluctance to acknowledge a little good news? Headlines often make [headlines]( in our newsletter. Not everyone appreciates a flavorful headline. But how do you aptly capture a story as complex as the current economic situation in the United States? And was it fair to say the economy grew, whether we “believe it or not”? Senior Business Editor Rafael Nam, who wrote the headline in question, said it was meant to address how people feel about the current economy. “Although by the numbers we are seeing the strongest growth since 1984, many Americans do not feel like that at all, as Scott [Horsley] addresses in his story,” Nam said in an email. “Economic growth has been uneven, marked by strong bursts of growth that then get slowed down by a pandemic that continues to show its impact, both through the delta and the omicron variants.” Nam continued, “Add to that how inflation and supply chain woes are impacting the economy, and for a while people have not been feeling as if this is an economy posting its strongest growth since 1984, despite what the numbers show. That’s been shown in numerous polls. The headline was purposefully meant to speak to that dissonance, although I am aware that some of them found it provocative.” NPR's Chief Economics Correspondent Scott Horsley, who reported the story and spoke to All Things Considered guest host Asma Khalid about it, told me via email that he tried to describe an economy that is currently mixed. “On the one hand, unemployment is low and GDP growth is high,” he said. “On the other hand, stubbornly high inflation is eroding people’s buying power, supply chains are still snarled, and the workforce has yet to recover to pre-pandemic levels — which is not surprising since we’re still very much in the pandemic. By many objective measures, the economy’s rebound over the last year and a half has been dramatic.” But this bounce back has not been as strong as many people expected in early 2021 when vaccines were rolling out, Horsley said. There are still many people who remain unvaccinated against coronavirus, which he said leaves the United States vulnerable to repeated waves of infection and the economic fallout that comes with it. Horsley said he understands the frustration of audience members who view this economic coverage through a political lens. “President Biden’s approval rating on the economy has fallen sharply, and any stories describing shortcomings of the recovery may be perceived as criticism of his policies,” he said. He noted that he hears from listeners and readers regularly who share those complaints and takes them seriously. “I agree that the tone of our coverage may affect people’s impressions of the economy and I think we must be careful not to overhype the positive or negative,” Horsley said. “Last week’s GDP story illustrates the challenge: How to describe an economy that is growing at the fastest pace since 1984 and yet still leaves many people anxious and unsatisfied. I tried to paint a nuanced picture that did justice to both the economy’s strengths and weaknesses.” Journalists are generally known for having some degree of skepticism. They have to if they want to detect lies, distortions or misrepresentations, especially as misinformation spreads quickly online. But if you read Horsley’s work, he strove to give as full a story about the economy as he could. — Amaris Castillo We ask NPR journalists one question about how their work came together. Hey, what about Iowa? We broke a snowfall record, too. [A snow plow clears Main St. on January 16, 2022 in Greenville, South Carolina. Snow, sleet and freezing rain are expected in the area for the remainder of the day.]( Sean Rayford/Getty Images WEATHER [A major winter snow and ice storm is battering the Southern U.S. and moving north]( We noticed a recent NPR web story about a major snowstorm [coming to the South]( on Jan. 16 and a piece picked up from the AP on heavy snowfall [in the Northeast]( on Jan. 17. But we didn't see a story on [record-breaking snowfall]( in the Midwest (where I live) that happened the same weekend. ([One story]( from that weekend did say that the storm about to slam the South had already walloped North Dakota, Minnesota and Iowa.) We felt … ignored. When NPR [warned]( heavy snow was coming to the Northeast this past weekend, [one audience member tweeted]( “In other words, potentially any day in winter in northern Minnesota,” in reply. After the storm rolled through, we saw [stories from Boston]( which tied its [record]( for the most snow in a single day at just under 2 feet, and other parts of the region [hit hard]( with snow. We wanted to know which weather events are worthy of national coverage. We talked with Dana Farrington, morning supervising editor for Newshub, which is a digital-focused team of editors and reporters. She said it depends on the day, on how many stories are competing for the newsroom’s resources at any given time and on the impact of the weather. Generally speaking, she said, the factors Newshub takes into consideration are, “How much of the country is affected? How many people? But the other thing is, how rare is an event? So snow in a place that always gets snow versus snow in an unexpected place,” Farrington said. If something affects a smaller group, but is “a rare event, [indicative of climate change]( or greater weather changes that tell us sort of a [broader story]( it may be deemed more worthy of coverage, she said. Vickie Walton-James, chief national editor, oversees national reporters who cover weather events on air — for example, storms like the one that [froze Texas last winter]( or tornadoes and snow squalls that [whipped through the Midwest]( in December. She said if “a significant number of people are affected or if there’s a big loss of life, correspondents cover.” We can see how snow in the South seems more newsworthy because the South has fewer resources for shoveling out, while Midwestern winter snowstorms are more normal and the states there are often more prepared to address it. While the AP story on the Northeast on Jan. 17 didn’t necessarily meet the rarity factor because it snows there often, it did meet the impact threshold: Thousands were without power. And it goes without saying that nearly 2 feet of snow in Boston in a day this past weekend is newsworthy. The [snowstorm]( that blew in last weekend as a result of the nor’easter delivered even more impact and seemed more newsworthy. Yet, the Midwest snowfall did set records in some locations and also caused hundreds of car crashes. It seems that those circumstances should have made it worthy of coverage, too. But, as Farrington indicated, there were other equally newsworthy happenings that may have taken resources at the time. If you live in a less-populated part of the country, the threshold for your weather to make the national news is higher. And that may leave you feeling unseen because all of us have to deal with the weather. It’s a tall order to cover each region of the U.S. equitably, but nonetheless, audience members expect to be represented in the news they consume. When they don’t feel represented, it gives them reason to feel national news outlets like NPR aren’t for them. In a world of declining trust in national news, that’s a problem. — Emily Barske The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo, Kayla Randall and Emily Barske make this newsletter possible. Illustrations are by Carlos Carmonamedina. We are still reading all of your messages on [Facebook]( [Twitter]( and [from our inbox](. As always, keep them coming. Kelly McBride NPR Public Editor Chair, [Craig Newmark Center for Ethics & Leadership at the Poynter Institute]( Kelly McBride Public Editor Kayla Randall NPR Amaris Castillo Poynter Institute Emily Barske Poynter Institute The Public Editor stands as a source of independent accountability. Created by NPR's board of directors, the Public Editor serves as a bridge between the newsroom and the audience, striving to both listen to the audience's concerns and explain the newsroom's work and ambitions. The office ensures NPR remains steadfast in its mission to present fair, accurate and comprehensive information in service of democracy. [Read more]( from the NPR Public Editor, [contact us]( or follow us on [Twitter](. You received this message because you're subscribed to Public Editor emails. This email was sent by National Public Radio, Inc., 1111 North Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC 20002 [Unsubscribe]( | [Privacy Policy]( [NPR logo]