OPINION: On covering a contentious sheriff’s race

Sometimes we get public documents or perhaps quotes from reliable, on-the-record sources that warrant a story. For instance, we ran a story recently about the sheriff’s stump grinder sale along with the former sheriff’s purchase of guns.

Other times there might be some sort of allegation, but unless there is solid evidence that we can acquire to back it up, we won’t publish it. For instance, there might not be appropriate documentation. Or, the person who could confirm or refute something refuses to talk on the record or to even call us back.

Or, an allegation could be manufactured and a straight-up hit job, where we’re being played if we take the bait. There are plenty of scenarios.

It’s an interesting predicament when someone brings forth an allegation at election time, because either action or inaction by us can be interpreted as political bias. Conversely, any allegation presented to a newspaper during election time can be viewed as an attempt at political manipulation of the press.

So, newspaper people like my co-worker Margie Richards and me are caught between trying to shine a light on whatever warrants exposure versus being used as a political hatchet by one side against the other.

Of course, some papers come straight out and offer an endorsement on local races on their editorial pages. But we recognize that our opinions in the paper are of limited value during local elections. Opinions are everywhere. What is much more valuable is the attempt to provide balanced information and analysis that doesn’t include personal judgment one way or another. There’s very little of that.

This carries its challenges. Because you have to anticipate perceptions of bias. And sometimes bias comes in ways we don’t anticipate. For instance, I went down to the billboards of Clayton Lowe and Kip Thomas on Hwy. 29 the other day and took a photo to run in the paper. Then I realized when I called it up on the computer screen that because I was standing at a slight angle to the boards, I could be faulted for bias. I’m not an expert photographer, but I often shoot at angles because it makes a boring shot, like a billboard, look slightly more interesting. But because one candidate’s billboard was a little more prominent in the picture, it would surely be perceived as favoritism. So, I drove back down to the billboards and tried to get as centered as possible for a straight-on shot.

I have to pay careful attention during page layout, too, making sure that headline and caption sizes are equal. I try to make sure that candidates are presented in alphabetical order. Obviously, I don’t run a quote from one candidate without getting one from another. But you have to be aware of how much time you’re giving to one versus the other. Likewise, candidates are very particular about where their ads are placed in the paper. And that aspect of the paper — the “dummying” or deciding where ads go — is actually handled by company advertising staff in Jefferson who don’t have any connection to Madison County politics. (I live in Madison County and am responsible for all the content that goes around those ads). But every election we get complaints about bias on ad placement even though I know there’s absolutely nothing of the sort going on with that.

Ultimately, convincing everyone that we are trying to cover local politics in an unbiased manner is utterly impossible. I’ve gotten complaints both ways during this contentious sheriff’s race. All we can do is try to adhere to the processes we feel are objective — getting quotes from all sides, trying to provide equal time, taking allegations from all sides seriously.

We’ll have a Republican candidate for sheriff come Tuesday. And I’ll be relieved, along with a number of other people who are weary of the fight — with the candidates themselves at the top of that list.

While the contentious nature of this year’s race is a form of entertainment for some, it troubles me for one primary reason. I think good people stand outside this arena and see such animosity from certain citizens, then decide they want no part of it.

When I watch an actual boxing match, my first instinct is to think of those who love the person taking the punches.

A lot of people think the same. And they don’t want to put their families through such a thing. So, when you take delight in assaulting someone who has entered the public arena in a vicious manner, you must also recognize that the person you might admire for the office is watching too.

That potential great candidate may see your behavior and decide against serving you.

It happens all the time.

Zach Mitcham is editor of The Madison County Journal.