PressEthic

The New York Times reported today that Private Lynddie England was found guilty of misconduct in the Abu Ghraib Abuse trial. England has become the poster child for this disturbing case, she was in some of the most offensive pictures taken. I originally planned on making this a post about the misplacement of the article in the The Times--it was found on page A12, and on the front page it received only a blurb in the bottom right hand “Inside” section. I think that the newsworthiness of the article should have ranked slightly higher than the front-page story headlined "To Conserve Gas, President Calls for Less Driving".

But tonight I noticed that there were some new stories cropping up on the Google News page that differ slightly from the scene that was relayed in The Times this morning. This morning’s article says, “Standing at attention in her Army dress uniform, Private England remained stoic as the verdict was read, as she has throughout the five-day trial.” There is also a picture of the stoic England taken after her conviction in which she does indeed look free of emotion.

However, in a Reuters article posted tonight, the scene is described in much more detail and there is nothing stoic about it. This article reports, “She stood at attention to hear the verdict and remained standing and looking towards the front of the courtroom after the trial ended as tears welled in her eyes. Her mother, Terrie, then came over to give her a very long hug.” A more recently posted article on the trial by the Times confirms the show of emotion, saying that England "hung her head and cried" as she heard the verdict. This article states that this was one of the few signs of emotion that England had shown over the course of the trial.

The two stories from the Times are by the same reporter, Daved S. Cloud. It strikes me as odd that Cloud saw the scene differently over the course of the day. How can Cloud go from seeing her as stoic, to then writing of her display of emotions? The small detail of England showing emotion is an important one because it humanizes her. The original article has, in my opinion, lost some credibility, as has the reporter.