PressEthic

If you heard the news about conservative Bill Bennett's recent comments, you were surely appalled. Responding to a caller on his radio show who asked about the effect abortion has had upon Social Security, he said, "I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down."

It was the type of comment that makes liberal Op-Ed columnists salivate: a conservative, powerful Republican letting his guard down and admitting what they has known all along, that the GOP is a party a hate. It even prompted the White House to distance themselves from their compatriot, deeming the comments "inappropriate." However, if viewed in the context in which they were given, the comment Bennett made was not only accurate, but completely innocuous.

Viewing the complete transcript transcript of the radio program shows how skewed the reporting was on this issue. Just prior to the inflammatory comment, Bennett cited the recent best seller Freaknomics (by renown economist Steven Levitt and NY Times writer Steven Dubner) as the orgin of his hypothesis, which asserts that the newfound availability of abortion in the '70s is partly responsible for the decline in crime in the '90s. The author of the book, while distancing himself from certain aspects of Bennett's comment, supported Bennett's rationale, writing on his blog: "He made a factual statement ...", clarifying the remark by saying, "...it would also be true that if we aborted every white, Asian, male, Republican, and Democratic baby in that world, crime would also fall." So, the basis of what Bennett's said, however improper and controversial, is valid, at least according to one of the most accomplished economists in the country.

Yet, this is not just another case of the media failing to do its homework. Immediately following his apparently offensive statement, Bennett qualified it by saying, "That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky." Anyone who has followed the career of Bill Bennett knows that he doesn't support abortions or killing a race indiscriminately; he was quite obviously making a rhetorical point. The only explanation, therefore, is that certain members of the press deliberately took Bennett's comments out of context and publlicized them, knowing full well that their original intent was far from racist or pro-genocide via abortion.

Press Ethics usually means "Don't lie" or "Don't make up sources." However, situations where reporters willfully disregard context deserve as much attention in our class because they arguably contribute more to the public's lack of trust in the practitoners of journalism. Bennett's comments, innocuous when viewed in context, simply weren't newsworthy; he was guilty of nothing more than being glib, famous, and willing to discuss controversial topics. It was not only innacurate to publish Bennett's comments out of context, it was unethical.