The Anchor as Activist

FRED BALES
University of New Mexico
Frank Larue, fifty-five, is the leading television anchor in your city, one of the top seventy-five markets in
the nation. He has been a prominent journalist in the city for more than twenty-five years and has anchored
the 6:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M. news at each of the three local network affiliates at various times. He is an
active Roman Catholic, known for supporting charitable organizations in the community. On the air he
promotes good causes, including a segment featuring children awaiting adoption. As a result, most of the
children shown find homes, and some are shown again in follow-up reports.
Recently the local chapter of Forces Against Abortion staged a protest outside a downtown clinic
where abortions are performed. About fifty of the protestors blocked the entrance to the clinic and were
arrested after being asked to move by police. The protestors did not attempt to resist arrest by city police.
Larue joined another group of protestors, about thirty-five in number, who maintained a prayer vigil outside
the clinic but did not block the buildings entrance.
Larue stayed and watched the arrests but took no other action. The event was covered by local
newspapers and television stations, and Larues presence was noted in at least one news account. One
newspaper reported incorrectly that Larue left before the arrests.
Larue did not inform his news director or other station officials of his plans to protest, saying that he
made his decision to appear outside the clinic at the last minute.
Larues station receives more than forty calls after the incident. The callers split about evenly over the
propriety of Larues taking part in the protest. Many callers wondered whether the anchorman was there as
a reporter or a participant.
At the beginning of the 6:00 and 10:00 P.M. news that evening, Larues co-anchor reports on the
protest, but immediately afterward Larue informs the viewers that he was at the protest as a matter of
personal conscience. He assures viewers that his position on the abortion issue does not affect his
coverage of the news and that he has not been involved with the coverage of those events.
In a follow-up newspaper account of the incident, the stations general manager expresses
disappointment that his anchor took part in the event. The general manager adds that news personnel should
be observers and not participants at events which may become the object of news coverage. He promises to
talk with Larue in the next few days about the anchormans action.
Larue says in the same article that he is unhappy about having to learn about his general managers
comments from a newspaper reporter. Larue maintains that what he did was right and that he did not attend
the protest as a journalist. I dont see how anyone can tell me when and where I can pray, and about what I
should pray, he says.
Larue says he has made no decisions about future participation in anti-abortion protests, adding, Im a
big boy, and I know what the consequences are.

Micro Issues:
1. Is Larues presence at the protest newsworthy? Should he have commented on the story at all on his
own news show?
2. How does Larues act affect the stations credibility?
3. Should Larue have warned his news director about plans to be part of the protest?
4. What decision should management make about Larue and his future anti-abortion activities?

Middle-range Issues:
1. Does Larues action cause credibility problems for journalists in general, giving ammunition to those
who say that journalists have extreme biases that influence their reports?
2. If a journalist unknown to the publica newspaper copy editor or a production assistant at a television
station, for exampletook the same action as Larue, should that journalist be admonished in the same
manner that Larue was admonished? Why?

3. What differences lie in allowing Larue to vote in electionswhere by definition he clearly expresses a
political bias and is seen by fellow votersbut not allowing him to spend a few minutes in a silent
vigil at the anti-abortion event?
4. As Larues boss, would you object more strenuously to his belonging to the board of directors of
Forces Against Abortion than to his participation in the protest?

Macro Issues:
1. Do journalists have to give up all community activity and any outward representation of personal
views because of their position? If not, then cite some cases where community activity is allowable.
2. What obligations of stewardship does a journalist in Larues position have that might prompt him or
her to lay aside personal inclinations for the good of journalism as a whole?