Ethics policy: Upholding truth, integrity and the public interest

I have said it before and will continue to shout it from the rooftops: There’s a difference between an advocate and a reporter whether you’re talking about agriculture, politics, or college football.

One roots for a side; the other tells you what actually happened. A news reporter is not supposed to be your cheerleader.

Lately, there’s been some buzz in my world about whether ag journalists should be “on our side.”

The assumption seems to be that if a reporter covers a controversial issue, he or she must be against us. And who is “us” anyway? You don’t always agree on everything!

Reporting on something doesn’t mean endorsing it. It means recognizing that the issue exists, that it matters and that the audience deserves to understand all sides of it — even the ones that make us uncomfortable.

A journalist’s job isn’t to protect an industry or polish its image. It’s to inform, investigate and present the facts as fully and fairly as possible.

What I’m doing right now is commentary, offering you my personal take. That’s very different from what ag news reporters do when they’re on the job, which is to report the facts, not opinions.

Good journalists don’t just pick a side and run with it. They report the news. All of it. Even the parts you might not like. Even the parts they might not like.

“Real” reporters, ag or otherwise, should provide timely, relevant news and information to keep you informed — not spoon-fed with one-sided political mumbo jumbo.

You deserve more than that. You deserve the truth, the whole truth and, sometimes, the uncomfortable truth.

Balanced reporting means covering more than one perspective. And sometimes that means giving airtime or ink to opposing voices.

That doesn’t mean the reporter agrees with them. It just means they’re doing their job.

I’ve seen folks go after ag reporters, accusing them of being anti-ag because they dared to report on something controversial — maybe an environmental concern, maybe an activist group, maybe even a regulatory issue.

And the same people who get fired up over biased reporting on national news are now demanding ag reporters be biased in agriculture’s favor or, at least, in support of their viewpoint. You cannot have it both ways, folks.

No bending the story to please advertisers, powerful people, or even industry groups.

When I hire reporters for Brownfield Ag News, I am not looking for advocates. I’m looking for people who are curious, fair and not afraid to ask tough questions.

If someone wants to champion or endorse something, that’s fine. But they’ll need to find another job title.

You can’t defeat what you refuse to understand. If we in agriculture are going to face criticism — and we will — wouldn’t you rather know where it’s coming from?

Knowledge is power. Ignorance is not a strategy. Pretending your critics don’t exist doesn’t make them disappear.

We need journalists who can walk the line between fairness and fearlessness. That’s not being disloyal, it’s being professional. And we could use a lot more of that.