The call came from a journalist who said he thought he had a simple question: “Can a journalist’s spouse participate in a political campaign?”
His tone of voice suggested he was not having an easy time finding a solution.
The caller said his wife wants to work for one of the presidential candidates by volunteering at a campaign office with what we might call “back office” work. She would stuff envelopes, initiate and answer telephone calls and do the behind-the-scenes stuff that thousands of faceless citizens perform during political campaigns.
I'm not identifying the journalist for a couple of reasons. Journalists seek our guidance at Poynter, in most cases, with the expectation of confidentiality. In this case, the nature of the decision is both personal and professional.
This journalist knew his spouse really wanted to do this campaign work and he, in spirit, wanted to support her. He also recognized that there is an ethical pressure point that needed to be considered.
Journalists generally don’t get personally involved in political campaigns. Many news organizations have written guidelines that either prohibit that activity or strongly discourage it. Even in the absence of spelled-put policy, journalists know that there are ethical landmines in these situations. They know that by tradition journalists stay away from active participation in political campaigns.
That tradition is built on the ethical principle of independence. Journalists cover politicians, campaigns and elections. The public expects – or at least should expect – that the journalists accurately and fairly report the stories. The journalists don’t twist or tilt the coverage to reflect their own political beliefs.
If journalists are activists in campaigns, it would create a conflict of interest –- or at least a perceived conflict of interest -- that could erode that principle of independence. That would undermine the credibility of the reporting. At the very least, the conflict of interest issues would become a distraction and get in the way of the journalism.
The journalist who was calling me knew all that. That’s why he had been wrestling with his ethical challenge. He’s a local television anchor, and while he doesn’t directly report on the presidential election, he does read stories in his newscast about the campaign. He rightly wondered whether his spouse’s connection to one of the presidential campaigns would be an ethical issue. He worried that her active support of a candidate would impact his credibility and that of his television station.
He had done some research on the matter. He had reviewed the ethics policies of several news organizations. He found precious little guidance.
So, I asked him a number of questions:
- What would be the nature of the work your wife would do for the campaign? Would her name be attached to any of the material being distributed? Would she be using her name in phone calls? Is her last name the same as your last name?
- Is it possible that she might move from this “back office” support role to public campaigning for the candidate? Would she attend rallies? Seek campaign donations?
- Would your wife be making monetary donations to the candidate? From a joint checking account?
- Would it really matter whether her campaign involvement is minor or more significant? Would it really matter if she remained “anonymous” in her role?
- Does your television station have a policy that addresses this matter, and if so, what does it tell you.
- Have you discussed this issue with your boss?
- If your wife were to become involved in the campaign, what checks and balances could you put in place to protect your journalistic credibility? Is it reasonable and feasible for you to avoid reading any stories about the presidential campaign, to totally recuse yourself from any connection?
I was pretty clear with this journalist that I believe there are substantive reasons why his spouse should take a pass on active participation in the campaign of the presidential candidate. I know he can’t control the decisions she makes, and shouldn’t do so. But I hope his wife would recognize the ethical bind her political activity might create for her journalist spouse.
I recounted for the caller my own experience in this matter. A number of years ago, my wife, Carol, put a sign in our front yard supporting one of the presidential candidates in that campaign. When I saw the sign, I offered a few thoughts to her about why I thought it was a bad idea and how it could have a negative impact on my credibility as someone who sometimes wrote about the coverage of that political campaign and who advised other journalists on the ethics issues of such coverage.
Carol wasn’t thrilled about my point of view. She has some strong political views and felt it was her right to express them.
We kept the discussion going for a day or so, and then I noticed the sign had disappeared from the yard. It was in the trashcan. Well, the pieces of the sign were in the trashcan.
I'm not sure she totally agreed with my concerns, but she respected them. She recognized that even though the traditions of journalism and the ethical policies built on the principle of independence didn’t directly apply to her, that her actions had an impact on me.
I urged the journalist who was calling me to continue the discussions with his spouse and to also vet the matter with his boss at the television station.
It's possible he and his wife made a different decision than what I suggested, but I respect that he took the time to make a good decision. He recognized the ethical issues. He considered the positions of other stakeholders. He thought through potential consequences. He sought some outside guidance. He weighed alternatives. It's a process that produces sound decisions.
