CanWest — Canada’s largest newspaper agency — has been inserting the word ‘terrorist’ into Reuters reports, in place of Reuters’ terms ‘insurgent,’ ‘rebel’ or ‘activist.’ Reuters isn’t happy about this, and informed CanWest that if they intend to continue the practice, they should remove Reuters’ name altogether from the byline. From NY Times coverage:
“Our editorial policy is that we don’t use emotive words when labeling someone,” said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters’ global managing editor. “Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline.”
Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to “confusion” about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations.
“My goal is to protect our reporters and protect our editorial integrity,” he said.
So the intimidation of journalists — which effects even langugage choice — is openly acknowledged by this high-ranking Reuters editor. A first, to the best of our knowledge.
Why does CanWest feel compelled to adjust Reuters copy?
Scott Anderson, editor in chief of CanWest publications and an author of the policy, said Reuters’ rejection of his company’s definition of terrorism undermined journalistic principles.
“If you’re couching language to protect people, are you telling the truth?” asked Mr. Anderson, who is also editor in chief of The Ottawa Citizen. “I understand their motives. But issues like this are why newspapers have editors.”
Mr. Anderson said the central definition in the policy was that “terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians in pursuit of a political goal.”
For more on this matter, see HonestReporting’s special report, ‘Calling Terror by its Name.’
