Answering to some sharp high school students

I spoke Friday to journalism students at St. Francis High School in Louisville, Ky. This private institution bills itself "the school of thought" and has one of the coolest logos: "!" That's it. "!"

St. Francis also has a small band of students who are considering issues in journalism. Who knows whether any of them actually will make news-gathering a career, but I suspect they'll always be smart consumers of information.

I answered as many of their questions as time would allow and promised to answer in this forum those I couldn't get to during class. Here goes ... (Because I know these -- and other -- students will be reading, please share your own answers to these questions.)

Did you ever want to write a piece or cover an issue that you were silenced on by your higher-ups?

Nope. Never. But have I heard of that happening? Yes.

The closest I ever have come to being "silenced" actually had to do more with indifference and nasty internal politics. I doggedly pursued a story about a suburban Chicago mayor whose mortgage was covered by a man whose company had received multimillion-dollar contracts from taxpayers of the mayor's city. Because of political pooh-pooh (I was considered too junior, and I remember a more senior reporter and editor complaining that I was working off my turf even though I covered that mayor and that city), the paper was sluggish about allowing me to work on the story. I didn't let up and picked at the project every chance I got. But the story sat on the back burner for a long time -- so long that I had time to find a job at a competing news organization. Guess which story was the first I pitched?

The story ran as a banner on page 1A under someone else's byline (again, I was considered too junior and fairly unknown given that I had been with the company for only a week), but I was compensated for my work.

Should anonymous sources be legitimate, allowed or relied upon?

Yes, yes and yes. Because of anonymous sources, we have uncovered massive government corruption -- some of which endangered lives. Because of anonymous sources, we have exposed crooked companies that have polluted air, land and water. Because of anonymous sources, we have put a stop to organized crime; publicly shamed those who have mistreated children, the elderly and the mentally ill. I could go on and on ...

However, journalists must take great care when using anonymous sources. We should somehow explain why the source's identity needs to be protected, and we should do our best to make clear what the source's motives are for sharing the information. We also should use anonymous sources sparingly.

How far do you think free speech extends?

To the degree someone is willing to be held accountable for what he or she says.

In this country, you can flap your trap about anything, and we should make sure things stay that way. But free speech doesn't allow someone to skirt responsibility for his or her words or expression.

Oddly, journalists have more limited speech than folks who don't work in the media. A couple of examples: Our employers often insist that we refrain from posting campaign signs in our yards and pasting such bumperstickers on our cars. We're discouraged from signing petitions.

As a journalist, what do you think of the situation involving (radio show host) Don Imus? (Perhaps addressing the issue of him as a journalist and what implications it might have on your profession)

Mr. Imus said something incredibly stupid and incredibly offensive. It's hard to come up with enough ways to criticize his comment. But as I just wrote, we should be free to say whatever we want -- and we should be prepared to be held accountable for our speech and expression.

Mr. Imus is a "shock jock," but he isn't a journalist -- and never has claimed to be. He has interviewed plenty of high-profile legislators, journalists and newsmakers, but that doesn't make him a journalist any more than it makes David Letterman, Howard Stern or Jay Leno a journalist.

My hope is that plenty of lessons have been learned from this mess. Among them is that it is dangerous to blur the lines between news and entertainment. CBS Radio and MSNBC helped to confuse the two -- which is why there's even been an ounce of debate about whether Imus is a journalist.

I'm also pleased that several notable journalists now realize their appearances on Mr. Imus' show were problematic. Newsweek has produced what I consider an admirable mea culpa. Newsweek writer Evan Thomas, a regular guest on Imus' show, told the magazine he sometimes wondered if Imus went too far. "But I rationalized my appearances by pointing to other prominent journalists and politicians who did it, too," he said. "I was eager to sell books, and I liked being in the in crowd."

Do you think it's possible that our generation could witness the extinction (or at least the radical marginalization) of the printed press in a shift to online and electronic media?

Sure, anything is possible. But do I think the news printed on paper is going to be extinct any time soon? Nah. Will it be marginalized? No, it will continue to have significant power. But will the "newspaper" need to be reinvented? Absolutely. I can't wait to see what's next and consider the change exciting.

What are the defining characteristics of an "amazing" journalist?"

• Unrelenting skepticism -- particularly of oneself
• Unrelenting desire to know the truth
• A commitment to treat everyone with dignity and respect that is recognized by everyone with whom the journalist comes in contact
• A commitment to conduct journalism consistent with the Society of Professional Journalists' ethics code
• The ability to talk to anyone about anything
• The ability to love the trade despite the pay
• The ability to write well (well as in Anna Quindlen and Jonathan Alter well. Well as in David Halberstam well.) because amazing journalism, regardless of medium, is almost always based on great writing.
• The ability to report even better than you write. You can't do that great writing unless you've done great reporting.

Why did you choose a career in journalism?

It's never the same day twice. I can ask just about anyone just about anything. Even though I don't feel as if this is true every day, I'm performing a public service in the grand scheme of things. I'm surrounded by intelligent, witty, humorous, biting, curious and often loudmouthed and irreverent colleagues. I'm surrounded by colleagues who are also highly sensitive, compassionate and caring. I am honored and privileged to be invited into people's lives -- and, when appropriate, to barge in on them. I believe in the old saying that we should "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." I love the idea that some small thing I have done has made someone else's life easier. I also love being paid to be informed.