I wanted to take a moment to write a letter to your paper about an article that I read in your paper while visiting your community for a very sad event. I was there for support of my husband's family during the loss of his great-nephew, Zachary England.
I realize that, according to the First Amendment, that gives the right to freedom of speech, newspapers can print what they assume are the facts at the time of print. However, in the state where I live, our news reporters make a great effort to report facts substantiated by "reliable sources" and they do not shield those sources by not printing their names.
I am aware that you state that this information was taken directly from police records that are available to the public. However, nowhere in your article did you state names of the sources of your information, and I know that this is also part of the records. A police officer in our state informed me that not all facts are given to newspapers in an ongoing investigation, so how could you, in all good reporting, report this incident as if you had all the information right at your fingertips? Check your drug list in one of the paragraphs and then just right below it you named an entirely different drug that you stated was taken. Your reporting lacked credibility.
I know that reporting is your job, but as an outsider to your community, I was appalled at the way the story was done and the timing of the story. Did you run a second article about the good that came about because of his death? The organ transplants, the hand transplant that this young man so freely gave? Isn't this news worthy? If you did an article, please forward this report to me I would love to read it.
Please remember reporting is more that reporting facts. Be very careful that you don't go for sensationalism at the cost of a grieving family.
