We examine two of the most recent cases of ruinous empathy in local reporting
Ruinous empathy is a term used to describe the phenomenon of journalists and news outlets becoming so empathetic towards their subjects that it clouds their judgement and negatively impacts their reporting.
In today's world, where emotions run high and opinions are polarized, it's more important than ever to maintain a healthy level of objectivity and impartiality in journalism.
However, the problem of ruinous empathy is becoming increasingly prevalent, and it threatens to undermine the credibility of the journalism industry as a whole.
The concept of ruinous empathy is rooted in the idea that journalists are human beings and are therefore prone to emotions and biases. When journalists become overly empathetic towards their subjects, they may become too invested in the story and begin to see it from the subject's perspective, rather than from an objective viewpoint.
This can lead to a situation where the journalist becomes a mouthpiece for the subject, rather than an impartial observer. This is particularly problematic in situations where the subject has an agenda or is trying to manipulate the media. When journalists become too empathetic, they may become susceptible to manipulation and their reporting may be skewed, rather than being based on facts.
Andrew Waite, an opinion columnist working for the Daily Gazette, wrote a column about Saratoga BLM’s disruption of the Feb. 7th Saratoga Springs City Council Meeting.
During the meeting, BLM activists shouted at, heckled, and intimidated community members who held an opposing opinion on various issues. BLM leader Chandler Hickenbottom took over the microphone and berated the city council for eight minutes. After a recess, Hickenbottom filibustered the meeting leading to its eventual cancellation. Saratoga BLM celebrated this on social media.
It is widely agreed that BLM’s disruptive behavior is detrimental not only to the community but also to the movement’s goals. Therefore, their actions should be condemned without reservation.
However, Andrew Waite started his article by giving BLM activists a free pass. He said, “Before I continue, let me say that I understand BLM activists’ anger. I understand that the reforms the movement has called for have been slow to arrive.”
One of the main problems with ruinous empathy is that it can lead to sensationalized reporting. When journalists become emotionally involved in a story, they may be more likely to focus on the dramatic aspects of the story, rather than the more nuanced and complex details.
This can result in a distorted view of the story that is not representative of the truth. This type of reporting can be especially harmful when the subject is a vulnerable person or a community that is already marginalized or oppressed. By sensationalizing their stories, journalists can contribute to further harm and discrimination.
Moreover, ruinous empathy can also lead to a lack of critical thinking and investigative journalism. When journalists become overly invested in a story, they may be less likely to question the motives of the subject or to investigate the facts thoroughly. This can lead to a situation where false information is spread, and the public is not given the full picture of a story.
This can also lead to a loss of credibility for the journalist and the news outlet, as readers may become disillusioned with a media that seems to be biased and unreliable.
Wendy Liberatore’s reporting on the Feb 7th City Council meeting is constructive here. Liberatore article focuses on the dialogue between Commissioner Jason Golub and Chandler Hickenbottom.
Liberatore writes about Golub’s response to Hickenbottom’s criticism but omits Hickenbottom’s disgusting attack against Golub, essentially accusing Golub of ‘not being a real black person’ because Golub chose not to attend a BLM event.
It's important to remember that journalism is a public service, and it is the duty of journalists to provide the public with accurate and impartial information. When journalists become too empathetic, they may lose sight of this goal, and the quality of their reporting may suffer as a result.
Furthermore, the rise of social media and the increased emphasis on sensational and emotive stories have only exacerbated the problem of ruinous empathy in journalism.
So, what can be done to address the issue of ruinous empathy in journalism? Firstly, journalists need to be mindful of their emotions and biases, and make a conscious effort to maintain their objectivity.
This may involve seeking out alternative perspectives, fact-checking information thoroughly, and avoiding sensationalizing stories. Additionally, news organizations need to encourage a culture of critical thinking and impartiality, and provide training and support for their journalists to help them avoid the trap of ruinous empathy.
Ruinous empathy is a serious problem in journalism, and it has the potential to undermine the credibility and public trust in the media. It's essential that journalists and news organizations take steps to address this issue, and work to maintain a healthy level of objectivity and impartiality in their reporting.
By doing so, they can help ensure that journalism remains a trusted source of information and a powerful tool for promoting truth, justice, and accountability.
Comments