THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN Watchdog or decoy? Huub Evers Harmen Groenhart Jan van Groesen part 2

Evaluation

The above over view shows that the RD readers' editor (coca is o ally) assume -

mes the role of house critic. First and fore most, howe ver, he is an expe rien -

ced jour na list explai ning how jour na lism opera tes and how a newspa per is

made. In addi tion, Haak gives infor ma tion: about what is going on in the

media world at home and abroad, espe ci ally the Ameri can media (drawing

analo gies with his own paper wher ever appro- priate).

In an inter view in the RD marking his appoint ment (2 April 2001), he

stated that he regar ded "explai ning the daily prac ti ces of a newspa per" as a

signi fi cant compo nent of his duties. In his first annual report, he wrote that

quite a few letters from readers contain requests for expla na tion rather than

complaints. They want to know why the paper does somet hing this way and

not that way. Many readers, he has gathe red from telep hone calls, emails and

letters, have no idea how a newspa per is made and what it takes. The distinc -

tion between message bearer and message is far from clear: the newspa per is

held partly accoun ta ble for reports readers find disple a sing. An expla na tion

to that effect is greatly appre ci a ted.

Criti cisms regar ding the work done by the edito rial staff virtu ally always

pertains to lang u age errors and inac cu ra cies. These really aggra vate readers,

the readers' editor obser ves in his annual report 2001/2002: "I have but a

minor complaint," said the gent le man on the telep hone. To many readers, it

is preci sely those little mista kes and petty inac cu ra cies that affect the

quality of the paper in the long term.

Criti cal reviews of edito rial choi ces or jour na lis tic proces ses and

products crop up less frequently in the columns of the readers' editor. Any

such reviews are usually worded with due caution. A remar ka ble fact is that

Haak menti ons respon ding readers and jour na lists by their full name,

whereas Meens and Van Brus sel (see next chap ters) do not.

In some cases, criti cism is over cau ti ous, for exam ple in the column of 17

Janu ary 2004. The RD prin ted two photo graphs of a young man whom the

police suspec ted of a series of sexual assaults. The young ster, pictu red in a

56 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

clearly iden ti fi a ble manner, thereupon contac ted the police himself.

Among the edito rial staff, opini ons were divi ded. Wouldn't prin ting turn

the newspa per into a conti nu a tion of the police and the depart ment of

justice? The gene ral editors deci ded in favour of place ment anyway. Accor -

ding to the readers' editor, jour na lis tic media should exer cise maxi mum

reti cence in prin ting photo graphs in the context of an inves ti ga tion by the

judi cial autho ri ties. "After all, on a slip pery slope one is more likely to slip."

So, does the readers' editor disag ree with the gene ral editors? He proba bly

does but he refrains from explicitly saying so.

Some ti mes, the readers' editor is quite skil ful in sides tep ping criti cisms

from readers, for exam ple in his column of 29 June 2002. A reader obser ved

that an arti cle did not mention a suspect's last name, while his photo was

prin ted without a black bar across the eyes. Isn't that a bit hypo cri ti cal, he

would like to know. The readers' editor does not take up this cross pass at an

empty goal. He does not focus on consis tency in apply ing the rele vant

edito rial guide li nes but gives a gene ral disser ta tion on shif ting norms in the

protec tion of privacy by the media.

With regard to the complaint about menti o ning a suspect's non- common -

place first name, the readers' editor is rather quick to conform to the edito rial

guide li nes. Here, in fact, the paper enfor ces the privacy protec tion norms in a

manner that fails to protect the suspect's privacy. Some criti cal comments from

the readers' editor would be in order.

The column of 6 March 2004 deals with court repor ting and privacy

protec tion. Refer ring to some one from a tiny village with a popu la tion of

two thou sand by gender, age, first name and last name's initial is in accor -

dance with the house rules, yet proba bly fails to protect the privacy of the

indi vi dual concer ned. In such cases, the editors should be allo wed to devi -

ate from the paper's own rules, the readers' editor states. Here, too, the

readers' editor could make a stronger stand by inves ti ga ting the consis tency

of the edito rial guidelines.

A few months later (4 Decem ber 2004) the subject is Moham med B.'s

picture, which was broad cast in Opspo ring Verzocht without a black bar

across the eyes. Should the newspa pers follow suit? Haak does not think so.

There is no reason (yet) for editors to devi ate from the guide line formu la ted

by the Society of Editors-in-Chief in 1995. Preven ting the iden ti fi ca tion of

suspects remains the point of depar ture. Some one is only guilty after being

Expounder or critic? 57

senten ced by a judge. It would do no harm to review the column that was

writ ten nine months earlier in that light.

The editors-in-chief should still recon si der those privacy guide li nes,

accor ding to the readers' editor, espe ci ally in light of everyt hing that is

happe ning on Inter net sites. Does he perhaps have second thoughts about

the guide line he is holding on to?

Occa si o nally, criti cism is absent, even when criti cal evalu a ti ons were

expli citly reque sted. The econo mics editors submit ted an arti cle to the

readers' editor after publi ca tion. The editors wonde red whether they had

pain ted a proper and balan ced picture (in words and images) of the major

dock wor kers' demon stra tion in Rotter dam. Had they perhaps focu sed too

much atten tion on the riots and too little on all those men and women

campaig ning peace fully for better employ ment condi ti ons? The readers'

editor descri bes the case but refrains from giving a verd ict, in his column at

least.

A large propor tion of columns resem ble disser ta ti ons on deve lop ments in

the media and society as a whole rather than criti cal reviews of the newspa -

per. An exam ple is the column of 8 Septem ber 2001 on slavery and reces -

sion. Remar ka bly, Haak occa si o nally makes a stand in a more gene ral

debate, for exam ple the head scarf issue discus sed in his column of 21

February 2004.

In a few columns (7 Decem ber 2002, 3 Janu ary 2004 and 10 April 2004), the

readers' editor expli citly discus ses his own role and that of his colle a gues.

He states that through the years he has come to realise that "a readers' editor

should not think that a single item on a recur rent complaint or ques tion

from readers will suffice". On the other hand, he is not despai ring that "it is

all in vain". Kees Haak feels more of a readers' advo cate than the face of the

newspa per, although in his opinion it is a "welcome bonus" that there is

"also a PR side to this posi tion". Some ti mes he speaks out for the edito rial

staff, some ti mes he does not. Inde pen dence is paramount.

To his regret, he has found that half of the total number of ombud smen

or readers' editors in the Nether lands (six out of eleven, the column in

ques tion dates from 7 Decem ber 2002) consi de red retai ning readers as their

supreme goal. "They unas ha medly admit ted to being a conti nu a tion of the

readers service depart ment, with which they colla bo rate in an excel lent

58 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

manner. What is more, they are part of that depart ment. Or they colla bo -

rate with circu la tion and marke ting departments. (…..) It is impor tant that

we steer clear of what is happe ning in the United States, where some

newspa per mana ge ments are alre ady judging their ombud smen by the

number of readers they manage to keep from cancel ling their subscrip tion.

Little or nothing remains of their origi nal self-criti ci sing role; their

credibility lies in the gutter."

Expounder or critic? 59

60 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor?

A close look at two hundred columns by the Volkskrant

ombudsman (2004-2008)

Huub Evers

This study focu ses on ques ti ons pertai ning to the inde pen dence of ombud -

smen, among other things. Is it possi ble for ombud smen to adopt a criti cal

atti tude, in the sense of asses sing and evalu a ting, towards the edito rial staff

and the gene ral editors? Do they do this? To what extent and in what

manner? What themes do they discuss in their columns and with what

frequency? Do they usually respond to complaints from readers or mainly

present their own obser va ti ons? Do they also discuss issues raised by their

own edito rial staff? Do they come up with recom men da ti ons to improve

edito rial policy? What aspects rela ting to profes si o nal ethics are considered

in the columns?

In this part of the study, answers to these ques ti ons were obtai ned by

survey ing and analy sing the columns writ ten by Thom Meens, the current

ombuds man of the Volks krant. The columns were clas si fied accor ding to

date and subject(s), as many discus sed multiple subjects. Subse quently, we

indi ca ted for each column whether the ombuds man was exer ci sing an

expoun ding or an asses sing role. Occa si o nally, he used his column to

clarify edito rial policy in response to complaints. In other cases, he passed

either a posi tive or nega tive judge ment on edito rial proces ses or products.

This usually entai led criti cism regar ding arti cles or jour na lists' methods of

working. In a number of columns he discus sed events and deve lop ments

that took place in the media world and that, in his opinion, meri ted consi -

de ra tion. For exam ple, he devo ted atten tion to events and deba tes on the

media in gene ral: the contro versy between Mabel and Prince Johan Friso

and the media, the urban legends that are extre mely popu lar, espe ci ally

during the summer holi days, the credi bi lity of news reports broad cast by Al

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 61

Jazeera, the Guide li nes (code of ethics) draf ted by the Nether lands Press

Coun cil and the tension between govern ment control and self-regu la tion

in the media sector.

In a number of cases he formu la ted policy recom men da ti ons, for exam ple

with regard to a retort page at set times. We also indi cate for each column

whether it discus sed a theme rela ted to profes si o nal ethics in journalism.

Meens commen ced his duties as ombuds man to the Volks krant on 1

Janu ary 2004. Once a week, he writes a column that is publis hed in the the

Satur day paper. He writes between 45 and 50 columns a year. His two

hundredth column was publis hed on 5 April 2008.

Thom Meens is the fourth ombuds man serving the Volks krant. Jan Kees

Huls bosch, the first ombuds man, took up office on 13 Septem ber 1997.

Next came Theo Klein and Jos Klaas sen.

What are the topics most discus sed by the ombuds man, either because they

elicit many reac ti ons from readers or based on his own obser va ti ons? The

top ten topics are listed below.

¨ Se ven teen co lumns ad dress the the me of "on li ne jour na lism prac -

ti ces" in dif fe rent va ri ants. Do the ru les that ap ply to the pa per's

web si te dif fer from tho se that are in ef fect for the printed paper?

¨ Anot her the me that crops up fre quent ly, viz. in six teen co lumns, is

the pri va cy pro tec ti on of sus pects, con victs, vic tims and ot her par -

ties. How cau ti ous is the Volks krant in this res pect?

¨ Fif teen co lumns are de vo ted to what the om buds man re fers to as

"mo de ra ti on": does it have to be this blunt? Doesn't the new spa per

fo cus far too much at ten ti on on some to pics? In some ca ses, the

com bi na ti on of text and pho tos seems rather excessive.

¨ Lang u a ge is anot her re war ding sub ject: thir teen co lumns deal with

sty lis tic and spel ling lap ses, in si nu a ting wor ding, co ar se ning of the

lang u a ge and use of the word "Mus lim" whe re in fact the aut hor

was re fer ring to a "terrorist".

¨ Re a ders re gu lar ly com plain that the he a ding does not co ver the

over to nes: in si nu a ting or even down right in cor rect he a dings are

dis cus sed in thirteen columns.

¨ Ele ven co lumns deal with the ne ces si ty of dis cus sing dif fe rent as -

pects of an is sue or the pa per's fail ure to do so. How far must a pa -

62 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

per go in its co ve ra ge of ot her si des? Is it al right to adopt

ac cu sa ti ons pu blis hed el sew he re without checking?

¨ Ten co lumns are about pho to graphs: (ex ces si ve ly) gru e so me pic -

tu res, sug ge sti ve pic tu res and ill-cho sen stock photos.

¨ The the me of let ters from re a ders is dis cus sed in eight co lumns.

What cri te ria do the edi tors ap ply when se lec ting let ters for pu bli -

ca ti on? What is their ap pro ach with re gard to ac cu sa ti ons in letters

from readers?

¨ Rec ti fi ca ti ons are also dis cus sed in eight co lumns. How

broad-min ded is the pa per's rec ti fi ca ti ons po li cy? Does a cor rec ti -

on in the om buds man's co lumn count as a rectification?

¨ Six co lumns deal with in ter ming ling edi to ri al and com mer ci al as -

pects, for exam ple, du ring par ti ci pa ti on in press trips or in ad ver ti -

se ments who se lay out ma kes them vir tu al ly in dis ting uis ha ble

from editorial contributions.

Standards for online journalism

The theme that is featu red most frequently in the columns is online jour na -

lism: how about jour na lism prac ti ces on the newspa per's Inter net site?

Does the website abide by diffe rent rules than the prin ted paper? On 5

Febru ary 2005 the ombuds man reports on a pecu liar course of events. The

newspa per publis hes ANP [Nether lands Nati o nal News Agency] news on

its website, has no autho rity over its content, but is never the less respon si ble

for this content. Thus, it is possi ble for an ANP item to be inclu ded in the

elec tro nic newslet ter. This letter is not adap ted. Via the newslet ter, visi tors

are linked through to the origi nal item, even when it has proven incor rect

or has meanwhile been superseded.

How far can a newspa per go in inclu ding URLs that are confron ting,

harm ful, degra ding or just plain wrong? That was the key ques tion in the

column of 29 Octo ber 2005. In its Satur day supple ment, the newspa per

featu red a major story on extreme inter net porn. The author argued in

favour of a ban on produ cing and viewing porn. But is it really neces sary to

include the addres ses of gros sly obscene Inter net sites, readers criti cise. Is

that not a form of cheap voyeu rism? The ombuds man appre ci a tes the deci -

sion made by the editors: stating web addres ses does not show anyt hing yet.

It is up to the reader to click on the links and, there fore, the readers them sel -

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 63

ves can decide what they wish to see. In that sense, provi ding links is not

compa ra ble to prin ting photo graphs. Photos confront a reader, the sordid

content of websi tes does not: the reader still has to go and look for whatever

he wishes to see.

Then the privacy rules on the site: is it gover ned by other norms than the

prin ted paper? The Inter net editors think so, the ombuds man does not.

After all, there is no need for a paper to assist in turning some one like

Moham med B., who murde red film direc tor Theo van Gogh, into a public

figure and a martyr, is there? Even though his name is used in full throug -

hout the Inter net, would the paper's own respon si bi lity not still stand? (5

Novem ber 2005).

A few weeks later (17 Decem ber 2005) the same ques tion crops up in

response to the report on the Hofstad group trial. Initi als or full names on

the site? Dele ting full names in readers' reac ti ons? And what if some one

submits anot her reac tion refer ring to the sites that do feature names and

photos? The ombuds man consi ders this a waste of time and a "diabo li cal

dilemma". The editors should not lose their heads over everyt hing that is

viable on the Inter net and ruled out in a prin ted paper, he states. These are

two sepa rate enti ties, the editors must uphold their own stand ards, in the

newspa per and on the website. Whate ver visi tors do is up to them.

One week later (24 Decem ber 2005), the column deals with blog gers'

prac ti ces: why shrou ded in anony mity and why accu sa ti ons without

hearing the other side of the story? On the inter net, propor ti ons are far

from balan ced: every one gets away with venting whate ver they like. The

ombuds man consi ders the deci sion to give blog gers control over their own

weblogs "under stand able but dang erous". Now, after all, those blog gers are

free to block out objec ti o na ble pursuers.

Anot her week later (31 Decem ber 2005) the ombuds man tackles the

pecu liar pheno me non that blog gers, whene ver the ombuds man for once

does not come down on their side, imme di a tely start ques ti o ning his inde -

pen dence. He then is regar ded as a decoy or alibi of the editors.

The editors' deci sion to open up the possi bi lity, by way of expe ri ment,

for every one to start their own weblog on the Volks krant Inter net site has

resul ted in unfo res een and, as far as the ombuds man is concer ned, unde si -

ra ble conse quen ces. Should the rules of the game be expan ded, he wonders

a week later (7 Janu ary 2006). On the Web too, common decency is impor -

tant, he states. The quality of contri bu ti ons and reac ti ons needs to be

64 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

impro ved. But does that mean that the prin ted paper's propriety norms are

also opera tive on the paper's inter net site? Do the editors bear respon si bi -

lity for the content as well? Unlike the chief inter net editor, the ombuds man

argues in favour of at least one rule: anyone who parti ci pa tes cannot remain

anony mous.

This theme returns frequently, for exam ple on 17 June 2006. Readers

who respond to the site often state their first name and domi cile only,

whereas the rules clearly stipu late, with regard to both the prin ted paper

and the website, that name, address and telep hone number must be provi -

ded. For lack of suffi cient regu la tion reac ti ons, the editors broke their own

rules and also placed incom ple tely signed reac ti ons in the prin ted paper's

letter-of-the-day section. The ombuds man calls this apply ing double

stand ards, inju di ci ous, howe ver under stand able it may be. Then scrap ping

the entire section would be a better idea: "no section at all would be prefe ra -

ble to one that is out of control". Appa rently, the gene ral editors feel the

same way by now, he adds in passing.

On 4 March 2006 he conclu des his column about the requi re ment for

stating names, addres ses and telep hone numbers in letters to the editor

with the cyni cal remark: "Anyone who does not want that, does not belong

on the letters page. Let him have his way on the Inter net, where anony mity

and alia ses seem to be more and more of a prer equi site for forming an

opinion".

In his column of 22 March 2008 he reports that a number of reac ti ons

have been remo ved from the site because they had been writ ten under diffe -

rent names but from the same email address. Respon ding under some one

else's name is not so bad "in the jungle of the Inter net", but it is repre hen si -

ble by the newspa per's stand ards. Anyone who enters the domain of the

newspa per and wishes to parti ci pate should abide by these rules.

The anony mity of reac ti ons was brought up once again when colum nist

Bert Wagen dorp deci ded to stop publis hing his column on the weblog

because he was tired of "volun ta rily submit ting to stabs in the back, false

accu sa ti ons, perso nal attacks and badge ring from whac kos". Why would

some one writing under his own name allow himself to be insul ted by

anony mous contri bu tors with their made-up names? And in more gene ral

terms: "should the editors conti nue to allow a small group of trou ble ma -

kers, whether anony mous or not, to terro rise the blogs?" The ombuds man:

criti cism is welcome but with some decency please. And kindly focus on the

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 65

content, not on perso nal attacks. Other wise, the Volks krant blog will overs -

hoot the mark (24 March 2007).

A week later (31 March 2008) the editors were once again "smac ked in

the face (…) by the Inter net world and its prevai ling prac ti ces". The Betoog

editors had remo ved a propo si tion about holi day homes put forward by a

pres sure group, which subse quently urged every one to vote for their propo -

si tion in order to advance it to the top of the agenda. The editors remo ved

the propo si tion because "the Volks krant does not wish its website to turn

into a plat form for action groups". The ombuds man disap pro ved:

"Opening a web to ideas entails the risk that it is hijac ked by action groups

or other indi vi du als with a parti cu lar inte rest". Anyone choos ing to operate

a website should accept the conse quen ces.

In a column devo ted prima rily to the large-scale reforms in the newspa -

per's Inter net site (3 June 2006), the ombuds man suggests placing all letters

submit ted on the site, without excep tion, in order to put an end to grum -

bling about unfair selec ti ons once and for all.

What to do with arti cles that have ended up in the paper's digi tal archi -

ves and years later have become a burden to those invol ved, because they

turn up at the top of the list when Goog led? For exam ple, rash remarks in an

old inter view, putting some one at a disad van tage in job inter views. Or,

what to do with arti cles menti o ning some one by name and falsely accu sing

that person of somet hing? Removal from the archi ves? Removal from the

Inter net, if that were at all possi ble? The ombuds man (24 June 2006) does

not appear to be keen on the idea ("falsi fi ca tion of history") but would be in

favour of deleting the name.

The "diabo lic dilemma" invol ving respon si bi lity for the content of blogs

on the Volks krant website is addres sed once more, this time in a quite pene -

tra ting manner, in a column (23 Septem ber 2006) promp ted by the weblog

set up by one of the foun ders of the PNVD, popu larly known as the paedo

party. Appa rently, this indi vi dual had been opera ting a weblog on the

Volks krant site for several months, in which he candidly propa ga ted the

views of his party about sex with chil dren. When this was expo sed by the

Geen stijl tabloid weblog, the Inter net editors infor med the editor-in-chief.

He deci ded to retain the weblog, arguing "we have free dom of speech, the

party has not been banned by the courts, it has been regis te red by the elec -

to ral coun cil and the blog ger is not contra ve ning the condi ti ons for use".

The newspa per's ombuds man disag reed enti rely with this point of view. In

66 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

his opinion, such repug nant ideas should not be allo wed based on lega lis tic

argu ments. "Why is the editor-in-chief faci li ta ting this party? Why doesn't

he just say that what the party pursues is morally repre hen si ble and there -

fore unde si ra ble in his newspa per? After all, sex ads are refu sed for that

same reason, aren't they? To the editor-in-chief, free dom of speech takes

prece dence over the moral argu ment. The party's views are in flagrant defi -

ance of the Volks krant edito rial statute and everyt hing the editors stand for.

Accor ding to the statute, the editors stick up for "those who have been

depri ved of their rights and those who are oppres sed". What about chil dren

that are sedu ced by adults to engage in sexual acti vi ties, wouldn't they fall

within both cate go ries? Shouldn't they be protec ted, viz. by barring every -

one who doesn't do so from your Volks krant weblog? (…) The

editor-in-chief claims that he advo ca tes free dom of speech, which is

commen da ble, but in my opinion this free dom has its bounds. Those

bounds run exactly where the paedo party defends its members' acti ons on

the Volkskrant blog, selling sexual acts with children as perfectly normal".

The editors may feel that they are only faci li ta ting somet hing but the

outside world only sees blogs at the Volks krant website. There fore, the

paper's rules of propriety should be obser ved there. And accor ding to those

rules, a paedo blog is unac cep ta ble, "unless the edito rial statute (…) has

been tossed over board by now," the ombuds man fumes.

The rela tion between the website and the prin ted paper was discus sed in

the column of 15 Septem ber 2007. The newspa per had publis hed a list of

subscri bers to the decla ra tion of support to Ehsan Jami's Ex-Muslims

Commit tee, flanked by an opinion item submit ted by one of the subscri -

bers. The decla ra tion of support itself was nowhere to be found, not even in

the form of a news report. The full text was, howe ver, avai la ble on the

website. The ombuds man consi de red that "a bridge too far". "The Inter net

and the website can comple ment the prin ted newspa per quite well, they

can offer added value in the form of short video films and the like, but they

can cert ainly not replace the prin ted paper". The reader is entit led to a

complete newspaper.

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 67

Privacy of victims

In its cove rage of the abduc ted Eiber gen girl, accor ding to the ombuds man,

the paper "blun de red in a terri ble way, viola ting the rules of its own Guide -

li nes Book beyond a shadow of a doubt". The paper prin ted a large photo

on its front page, showing the arri val of the abduc ted girl at her parents'

house after she was rescued. The victim and her mother were clearly iden ti -

fi a ble in the picture. The arti cle menti o ned the girl's full name and further -

more stated that she was sexu ally abused while being held hostage. Readers

were appal led: for a quality paper, such course of action is disgra ce ful by

any stand ard. In addi tion, it demon stra tes a huge discre pancy with the

manner in which perpetrators are protected.

The police had infor med the ANP [Nether lands Nati o nal News Agency]

that media atten tion would not be appre ci a ted upon the girl's home co -

ming. Yet the photo was prin ted; the editors consi de red it "subdued".

Further more, tele vi sion had cove red the home co ming all day and thus the

images had become news in their own right.

The ombuds man poin ted out to the editors that the paper's own stand -

ards must be norma tive, not the fact that other media keep lowe ring their

norms. The Volks krant has a respon si bi lity of its own, as do the photo

editors. They cannot just submit mate rial and leave the deci si ons up to the

gene ral editors. The photo editors should weigh their own pros and cons:

are we going to cover or aren't we? What pictu res do we take?

The ombuds man conclu des that none of the editors ques ti o ned the

propriety of the photo, let alone the combi na tion of photo and text. He

consi ders this "perhaps even more alar ming than just submit ting and prin -

ting the photo" (29 May 2004).

Shortly after, anot her mishap occur red. A woman who killed her three

chil dren and subse quently took her own life was refer red to by her full

name and age. The chil dren's names were also menti o ned in full. The

repor ter who wrote the arti cle was in doubt but deci ded to mention the

names because the news service and the nati o nal editors would still be revi -

sing his contri bu tion later that evening. Unfor tu na tely, this did not happen:

a matter of care les sness, defi ni tely not a well-consi de red policy. Yet the

ombuds man obser ved "that over recent years the editors have been incre a -

singly sloppy in their consi de ra tion for the privacy of perpet ra tors and

victims". In previ ous family trage dies the editors have also "crept incre a -

68 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

singly further up a slip pery slope, without so much as an inter nal exchange

of views" (5 June 2005).

Almost a year later (1 April 2006), the ombuds man reci tes a long list of

exam ples from the prece ding months' papers, whereupon he sighs that the

editors obvi ously do not now to cope with crime and violence victims.

Their privacy is not respec ted, "hope fully not inten ti o nally but purely out

of thoughtles sness". The guide li nes in the paper's Style Book, inci den tally,

are more clear with regard to suspects than with regard to victims, he subtly

remarks. On that latter cate gory they read: "Deal prudently with infor ma -

tion on victims, both road casu al ties and crime victims. In prin ci ple, refrain

from disclo sing the iden tity of victims of sexual crimes in order to protect

their privacy, unless ponde rous argu ments warrant other wise; do not refer

to those victims by their initi als either". In actual prac tice, edito rial policy

in this field is virtu ally non-exis tent, the ombuds man obser ves. "Repor ters

do whate ver they think fit, with all its conse quen ces". He conclu des his

column with the follo wing recom men da tion: "Victims of violence or

crimes have alre ady suffe red enough. The newspa per does not need to

aggra vate their situ a tion by stating their names and origins. If stating a

name does not add any meaning ful infor ma tion to the descrip tion of what

has happe ned, just leave it out. Respect the privacy of a victim at least to the

same degree as that of the perpet ra tor. Only some one seeking publi city of

his own accord or persons of national renown are referred to by name".

A couple of months later, the newspa per devo ted exten sive atten tion to

the death of an eight-year-old boy in Hoog er heide. He was murde red in his

school. The paper refer red to him by his first and last name. "Have the

edito rial staff gone comple tely mad?" the ombuds man subse quently wrote

(9 Decem ber 2006); the Volks krant never does anyt hing like that. The jour -

na list concer ned clai med he had stated the boy's full name quite inten ti o -

nally, as this was a unique case that had attrac ted a great deal of atten tion

worldwide. "The victim is a para gon of what sense less and irra ti o nal

violence can effect. (…) In this case, it is really prefe ra ble to give the victim a

name".

Both the police and the mayor menti o ned the boy's full name, as did the

other media. "What other media do does not have to be a crite rion for the

editors of the Volks krant. The paper has a respon si bi lity of its own and its

own norms of propriety". Yet not a single reader complai ned. Appa rently,

they appre ci ate the jour na lis tic rele vance but the ombuds man writes: "I for

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 69

one am still in doubt. I would not have menti o ned the name, to protect the

privacy of his next of kin and out of respect for the child. (…) I respect the

consi de ra ti ons of the repor ter who did mention the name but I do not share

them". After all, couldn't the paper have stated just the first name?

Martin Bril refer red to a victim by his full name in one of his columns

(23 Decem ber 2006). It provo ked quite a few angry letters. "I must admit,"

the ombuds man writes, "that reading that column on Monday left me

feeling rather uncom for ta ble. In my opinion, it cros sed the bounds of

propriety, even for colum nists". Bril takes a diffe rent view of the matter. He

inten ded to write a harsh item, shoc king people, in order to show the

harshness of the tragedy. In such a tragic case, it is impor tant to give the

victim "as perso nal a face" as possi ble. Bril himself felt that he had been reti -

cent, as he posses sed far more details that he had deli be ra tely refrai ned from

using.

"With this know ledge at the back of one's head, that parti cu lar column

takes on quite a diffe rent outlook and colour," the ombuds man writes. "It

then beco mes clear that the author, in his own way, sympa thi ses with the

girl. But without that addi ti o nal infor ma tion I failed to get his meaning, as

did many readers, and then such a column just overs hoots the mark".

Privacy of suspects

De Volks krant does not publish pictu res of suspects and cert ainly no iden ti -

fi a ble pictu res. There fore, it did not print the well-known photo of

Moham med B., the man who killed film direc tor Theo van Gogh: the right

to privacy protec tion outweig hed the inte rests of justice. The photo in

ques tion had alre ady been aired in the tele vi sion programme ‘Opspo ring

Verzocht’ [Wanted]. The editor-in-chief never the less deci ded that the

funda men tal line of privacy protec tion needed to be obser ved. In addi tion,

the inte rests of inves ti ga tion do not consti tute an argu ment in favour of

prin ting. Only the inte rests of jour na lism matter, but these were not invol -

ved here. All honour to the editor-in-chief, there fore, the ombuds man

opines (4 Decem ber 2004).

To what extent are public figu res entit led to have their privacy safe gu ar -

ded (18 June 2005)? For exam ple, the man who was suspec ted of supply ing

chemi cals to Saddam Hussein? It was suspec ted that Saddam Hussein used

these goods to exter mi nate part of the Kurdish popu la tion. The paper prin -

70 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

ted this man's name in full. Was this justi fied? The man did seek publi city of

his own accord but that was at a stage when he was still coun ting on prose -

cu tion being preclu ded by the lapse of time. Now that the judi cial autho ri -

ties are taking the matter to court anyway, he is entit led to privacy

protec tion, if only to prevent unne ces sary suffe ring by his next of kin, as the

suspect's last name is fairly uncom mon. "Frans van A." would be prefe ra ble

after all. It is rather "two-faced", the ombuds man admits as well, but "a fault

confes sed is half redres sed". Accor ding to the Volks krant rules, by the way,

the man should be refer red to as F. van A.!

When cele bri ties are invol ved (Michael Jack son, Dutch foot ball player

Robin van Persie), atten tion paid to privacy can be less strict. And what

about Moham med B.? Isn't the paper being more Catho lic than the Pope

here? The Inter net featu res his full name plus a picture without a black bar

across his eyes. That is all very well, the ombuds man comments, but "it does

not relieve the Volks krant of its norms and rules of propriety".

He returns to this issue in his column (5 Novem ber 2005) rela ting to the

special supple ment in comme mo ra tion of the murder of Theo van Gogh. It

does not state Moham med B.'s full name and the eyes in his picture have

been blac ked out. The ombuds man explains the paper's rules with regard to

suspects, convicts and victims. These guide li nes are also contai ned in the

nati o nal and inter na ti o nal codes of ethics.

But why then does the Volks krant website feature Moham med B.

without the black bar? This invol ves a multi me dia project by artists, a

collage of photo graphs of B. that toge ther make up his portrait again. The

inter net editors inten ti o nally left out the black bar for four reasons:

¨ B. him self sought pu bli ci ty with his fa re well let ter.

¨ He has be co me a pu blic fi gu re who se coun te nan ce is wi des pre ad.

¨ The pho to mon ta ge is a work of art and the re fo re sub ject to dif fe -

rent rules.

¨ The edi tors' po li cy in mat ters like this is not "chi sel led in sto ne".

The editor-in-chief agrees with this line of reaso ning: "It is an expres sion of

art, for which other laws apply. Further more, it has been execu ted in a

prudent manner. Addi ti o nally, I am not as much of a moral censor as the

ombuds man".

The ombuds man has some comments on the reaso ning of the Inter net

editors. True, with his fare well letter B. sought publi city, but that doesn't

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 71

mean that the newspa per is obli ged to contri bute to making him a public

figure? On the contrary, not menti o ning his full name prevents him from

turning into what he aims to be: a martyr. The paper must follow its own

line, which is consis tent and credible.

Then the funda men tal ques tion of why the website is cut more slack

than the prin ted newspa per. After all, both are versi ons of the Volks krant?

And if other rules apply, why print an iden ti fi a ble portrait and not a full

name? Is that not a half-hear ted decision?

The issue conti nues in the column of 17 Decem ber 2005. The website

featu red a report on the court procee dings against some members of the

Hofstad group. Acci den tally, two full names, as provi ded by the ANP, had

been left in. Once the mistake had been disco ve red, it was quic kly correc ted.

Mean while, reac ti ons from readers were alre ady pouring in: the Volks krant

pursues an old-fashi o ned and patro ni sing line in this respect, all the names

are avai la ble on the Inter net in less than no time, plus identifiable photos.

Howe ver, should the prin ted newspa per adopt the same stand ards that

prevail on the Inter net? The ombuds man speaks of a "diabo li cal dilemma":

is it neces sary to remove every reac tion menti o ning the full names? And

what if some o ne's reac tion inclu des a link to a site provi ding everyt hing in

full detail? Isn't that bang ing one's head against a brick wall?

But do those who read the weblog also read the prin ted paper? And is

that latter cate gory also in favour of abolis hing initi als and bars across the

eyes? Until there is clarity in this matter the editors should keep a level head

and hold on to their own stand ards. The website and the paper are "two

sepa rate enti ties": when the website over steps the mark, it does not neces sa -

rily entitle the prin ted paper to follow suit.

Why does the paper diffe ren ti ate between the desig na tion of suspects at

home and abroad (23 Decem ber 2006)? The inter na ti o nal pages refer to

two English men by their full names, whereas the nati o nal pages refer to a

Dutch suspect by just his age and domi cile. The reason for these double

stand ards is quite simple, the ombuds man writes, but "that does not make

the answer less unsa tis fac tory: in other coun tries, every one uses full names,

even the police. Reti cence in the media would be a chutzpah then. Very well,

but this igno res the editors' own respon si bi lity. The editors can always opt

for prudence, even if dealing with some one right on the other side of the

globe".

72 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

What about a former suspect, some one who has been dischar ged from

further prose cu tion? Dutch busi nes sman Guus K. was senten ced for ille gal

arms traf fic, but subse quently acquit ted on account of inva lid evidence.

Initi als first and then the full name? Accor ding to the ombuds man, the

reader who stated that the paper should have exer ci sed more caution has a

point. "One could indeed be more care ful, even after acquit tal, cert ainly as

long as the procee dings have not been wound up yet and may be follo wed

by an appeal or cassa tion. In that case, it would seem sensi ble to only use the

name after the last judge has passed judge ment and acquit ted, or, as would

be prefe ra ble for the suspect: dischar ged from further prose cu tion". In cases

invol ving Dutch cele bri ties or indi vi du als who have sought publi city of

their own accord, full names are menti o ned. That same rule applied to the

busi nes sman concer ned, Guus Kouwenhoven (22 March 2008).

Privacy protection of others

Parties other than suspects and victims are entit led to privacy protec tion as

well.

In August 2004, a Dutch soldier died in Iraq. He was killed in an

ambush. The next day the paper repor ted the news without - at the fami ly's

request - menti o ning the victim's name. Other media did report the

soldier's name and domi cile, as did the mayor of his home town, who was

not aware of the fami ly's request as it turned out later. The next day the

Volks krant refer red to the victim by name too, because the autho ri ties,

school and muni ci pa lity did so.

The ombuds man regards the editors' deci sion to start using the soldier's

full name as "not the most feli ci tous choice". Perhaps the editors should

have just stuck to the origi nal line. That other media make diffe rent asses -

sments should not play a part. "Readers opt for the Volks krant on account

of the fact that the editors make their own choi ces, not because the paper

strings along with all the other media". Opini ons on the editors' asses sment

may differ, he writes, but it does show "progress compa red with other issues

invol ving people's privacy. They at least consci ously chose to start using the

name, whereas earlier instan ces of such use all too frequently ensued from

care les sness". (21 August 2004).

And what to think of a thir teen-year-old boy locked up in a juve nile

deten tion centre for theft? He insti tu ted legal procee dings because he

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 73

wished to be admit ted to a peda go gic treat ment centre. The paper refer red

to him by his full name, adding that he was in for theft, that his mother was

a drug addict and that his father had died of drugs abuse. Later on, a large

back ground story menti o ned his older sister, also by her last name, as the

public alre ady knew that anyway. The editors had not contac ted the sister.

Accor ding to the ombuds man, the paper slip ped up right from its first item

on the boy and persis tently stood by its mistake. That was wrong, as the

protec tion of privacy should have prevai led over any other inte rest what -

soe ver (5 March 2005).

Was it really neces sary to include a detai led descrip tion of what exactly a

case of sexual abuse entai led (12 March 2005)? The repor ters wanted to

show what had happe ned, because "abuse is such a "catch-all notion".

Further more, they had left out more than they had writ ten down. On the

one hand, empo we red readers are entit led to know what went on but on the

other, the paper really does not need to print all those sordid details. A

dilemma to which this column does not provide a solu tion other than

commen ting that the editors ought to come up with an unequi vo cal answer

some time.

And what about an Amster dam urban nomad whose chil dren were

taken away by the child protec tion office? The paper menti o ned his full

name because the Amster dam daily Het Parool had also prin ted his full

details. There fore, his privacy was alre ady out on the street. In addi tion,

desig na ting him by his initi als would have crimi na li sed him and he was not

a crimi nal. In the opinion of the ombuds man, the refer ral to Het Parool

"did not hold water". The Volks krant must abide by its own stand ards. The

other argu ment (crimi na li sing) he consi ders valid. But then, why not make

the man anony mous? After all, his name did not matter, did it? (18 June

2005).

To what extent is a public figure, for exam ple an alder man, entit led to

protec tion of his privacy? This case took place in Nijme gen in Novem ber

2007. An alder man was alle ged to have engaged in sexual acti vi ties with a

coun cil lor in the bicy cle base ment. The secu rity came ras in the base ment

would have recor ded what was going on. Through a report on the tabloid

weblog GeenStijl, the affair made the nati o nal and regi o nal press. The

ombuds man tackled the issue in two of his columns (22 and 29 Decem ber

2007). Where do we draw the line between private and public? Can the

media trust in rumours? Shouldn't the Volks krant have deci ded to refrain

74 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

from paying any atten tion to the matter, consi de ring that this was some o -

ne's private busi ness? Isn't the paper allo wing itself to be hijac ked by raun -

chy poli ti ci ans or other media? Wouldn't anyt hing be prefe ra ble to being

swept along by a filthy campaign?

The ombuds man sket ches the dilemma: when the paper does not cover

the story, the editors are repro ached for being patro ni sing and withhol ding

infor ma tion from the readers. Those readers are perfectly capa ble of

forming an opinion of their own. Should the paper decide to cover the story

nonet he less, it will be repro ached for thro wing its prin ci ples over board and

having its editors bow to what other media do. The lines between what is

proper and what is not are "thin and at times highly diffuse". "Unfor tu na -

tely, the Inter net is often regar ded as the drain of common decency. It is

food for thought if the hype that is being crea ted there would induce seri -

ous media to down grade their own ethi cal bounds, like those pertai ning to

safe gu ar ding perso nal privacy". Yet the ombuds man feels that the paper

could no longer keep silent when the Nijme gen muni ci pal coun cil deci ded

to set up a public debate on the affair. At that time, it could no longer afford

to close its eyes.

Moderation: does it have to be this blunt?

Many readers commen ted on the reports on the attacks in Madrid in

March 2004, espe ci ally on the combi na tion of the front page photo and the

picture on the Voor kant, showing a woman's dead body. The ombuds man

consi ders the combi na tion "rather over the top". Look ing at the first three

pages made the horror caused by these attacks abun dantly clear. I could

have done without an addi ti o nal page". The editor-in-chief also speaks of

an unne ces sary "accu mu la tion". In criti ci sing the paper's mode ra tion, the

ombuds man hastens to add that there was no ques tion of "cheap profit

seeking" or lack of respect; the editors care fully weig hed the pros and cons

on the basis of "legi ti mate and justi fi a ble arguments" (13 March 2004).

The death of André Hazes ("the Nether lands' grea test singer of popu lar

songs after the war") promp ted a great many arti cles in the Volks krant. In

hind sight, it was "quite a lot", the ombuds man opines. On the other hand,

the items were very diverse in nature. Further more, "the newspa per owes it

to its stan ding to report on every aspect of such massive events (Hazes' fare -

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 75

well in the Amster dam Arena, H.E.). (…) The newspa per did not give in to

the temp ta tion of cheap senti ments either". (2 October 2004).

The reports on Ayaan Hirsi Ali "lack all mode ra tion," the ombuds man

writes on 26 Febru ary 2005. "She is indeed getting a lot of atten tion. Every

step she takes is cove red, frequently in words and images. Howe ver, that is

also because time and again she mana ges to stir up poli tics in the Hague.

Whether it is about honour killing or her own free dom of move ment, she

forces minis ters into action. Thus, her opera ti ons take on a dyna mism of

their own; the media are look ing on and report on whate ver she does. A lot

and frequently, for there is no-one who knows how to mani pu late the

media like this VVD MP. She leaks her news selec ti vely, which assu res her of

making the front pages". This is somet hing for which we can blame the

editors.

Well over a year later, the same ques tion crops up: wasn't the atten tion

focu sed on Hirsi Ali out of all propor tion? Accor ding to the ombuds man,

"the Volks krant editors indeed gran ted her nearly uncon di ti o nal access to

their columns". Ayaan was always news, "at times well-nigh hila ri ously so",

for exam ple when the front page repor ted that she had finis hed her script

for Submis sion II! She was "indeed more or less the poli ti cal pet among

(many of) the edito rial staff ". This, by the way, is unre la ted to the cove rage

of the press confe rence during which she announ ced that she would leave

poli tics and the Nether lands. That was just news, here "somet hing

un-Dutch happe ned, somet hing unpre ce den ted". Accor ding to the

ombuds man, this cove rage did not exceed any limits. Impor tant and funda -

men tal ques ti ons were at issue. It is impe ra tive for the paper to pay atten -

tion to such matters. Anyone who does not want to read that should just

skip those pages (20 May 2006).

When Pope John Paul II died, many readers complai ned about the

exces sive atten tion devo ted to this Pope. Had the Volks krant fluf fed up its

old Catho lic feat hers and lost any sense of discern ment and mode ra tion? In

the ombuds man's opinion, cove rage was not profuse and affor ded the

readers a good over view of all aspects. Was the paper suffi ciently criti cal,

readers wonde red. A commen tary by the editor-in-chief was, accor ding to

the ombuds man. Is that enough, in compa ri son with all those other pages?

Yet the atten tion compri sed more than just adula tion he obser ves, after

having read everyt hing once more (16 April 2005).

76 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

How much Talpa can a person take, many readers asked. Upon the start

of John de Mol's commer cial chan nel, the newspa per "went over board in its

mode ra tion", accor ding to the ombuds man. This was prima rily due to "the

paper's many coun ters", the sub-editors and poor commu ni ca tion between

the section editors. "Time to come to one's senses" (3 Septem ber 2005).

How much VVD can a person take, they asked nearly a year later. The

ombuds man consi de red espe ci ally the combi na tion of text and Rita

Verdonk's picture, some ti mes for days on end, often on the front page,

slightly over the top. News is news, but "somew hat well-balan ced, please":

not every bit of campaign news needs to be prin ted (6 May 2006).

In his column of 23 April 2005, the ombuds man argues, in a more gene -

ral sense, in favour of mode ra tion in the media. His plea is promp ted by an

inter view in the Satur day paper in which the State Secre tary for Defence

Van der Knaap let slip that he wished to be addres sed as "Your Excel lency".

This made the head li nes in all the media that week end, while that same day

the NRC Handels blad featu red a major story on Ruud Lubbers falling from

his pede stal at the UN refu gee orga ni sa tion. Feat hery light news is picked

up more readily than a well-wrought article.

Two months later (25 June 2005), this same pheno me non is highlighted

from the other side. Why have the deve lop ments in Iraq all but disap pe a red

from the media, while one suicide attack after anot her is carried out there

invol ving large numbers of casu al ties? And why are we not getting any

infor ma tion about the situ a tion of the popu la tion in and around Bagdad?

Have the media become tired of Iraq? For weeks, the inva sion of Iraq and

the fight against Saddam Hussein's army domi na ted the news. After

Saddam's fall, the picture changed, while the situ a tion clai med more lives

than during the war.

In an extra column on Wednes day 22 Novem ber 2006 the ombuds man

addres ses the commo tion that has arisen on account of the "torture item":

"Dutch tortu red Iraqis", the seven-column front page head line read.

During the days that follo wed, the subject garne red a lot of atten tion. It

became world news, "in part, proba bly, because the Volks krant went at it

hammer and tongs". Has the paper allo wed itself to be used, in order to

influ ence the elec tion campaign? The editor-in-chief denies this most

empha ti cally and the author of the arti cle claims that "no-one had expec ted

the news to have so much bearing in the lead-up to the elec ti ons". The

ombuds man is harsh in his judge ment: "If that is true, it is a sign of a highly

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 77

naïve outlook and a lack of poli ti cal aware ness among those invol ved. Of

course such a publi ca tion has a bearing, either inten ti o nally or unin ten ti o -

nally. Refrai ning from publi ca tion, for that matter, was no option either.

"There is always some one incon ve nien ced by a publi ca tion" and further -

more, there was the risk that the news would leak. Howe ver, the ombuds -

man does criti cise the paper's mode ra tion. Instead of using the word

"torture", the editors would have done better to opt for "abuse". "Torture" in

a seven-column head line aggra va ted the over tone. Readers also wonde red

whether perhaps the editors should have withheld the news "for the sake of

safe gu ar ding the secu rity of the Dutch troops abroad". "Anyone who really

means that makes it impos si ble for journalists to do their job," the

ombudsman comments.

The aggre gate of subse quent publi ca ti ons concer ning abuses invol ving

Dutch troops in Iraq also demon stra tes a lack of mode ra tion, the ombuds -

man claims in his column of 23 June 2007. This column is provo ked by the

reports on the inves ti ga ti ons by two commit tees into the origins of the

torture scoop in the Volks krant. "Time and again, I notice that the paper

seems to lose sight of all perspec tive in the event of (alle ged) big news.

Appa rently, there is no inter nal criti cal mecha nism ques ti o ning whether a

parti cu lar appro ach is the right way". In addi tion, the ombuds man expres -

ses his qualms about cert ain elements in the Iraq reports. Are they really

news? "I find it hard to avoid the impres sion that they have been drawn up

in part to justify the reporters' own opinions".

Wasn't the cove rage of a shoot ing at an Ameri can univer sity out of

propor tion, readers wonde red. The front page featu red a size a ble picture of

the shooter. It had been taken from a tape he had sent to a tele vi sion station

of his own accord, so "that in itself was news". Yet the next day the paper

prin ted anot her four photos from that same tape. This gave the ombuds -

man "an uneasy feeling". Too much of an evil thing? The photo editors do

not think so: "The series shows the shooter in stan ces he himself has chosen,

which consti tu tes substan tive infor ma tion". (28 April 2007).

Readers also criti ci sed the photo selec tion for an arti cle on a bizarre sex

affair ("HIV parties) in Groningen. A large photo block showed fifteen men

"in poses that left nothing to the imagi na tion". The next Satur day, the paper

featu red anot her photo block with thirty men. The pictu res were taken

from gay dating sites. Accor ding to the editor concer ned, the photos fit the

78 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

texts perfectly because the photo block "demon stra ted at a single glance

how expli citly and sex-orien ted some members of the gay commu nity

present them sel ves on the Inter net". Further more, the photos were taken

from public websi tes and the faces have been rende red uniden ti fi a ble. The

ombuds man still doubts whether a paper is entit led to print photos from a

gay site just like that. In addi tion, he has "qualms about its mode ra tion":

with two large blocks, the editors have gone over the top (9 June 2007).

Quite regu larly and spar ked off by current affairs, the ombuds man

recei ves repro ach ful ques ti ons regar ding the exces sive atten tion focu sed on

some one like Geert Wilders. Why provide some one like that with a stage for

blazing about his repre hen si ble, unde mo cra tic and racist views? The

ombuds man cham pi ons a divi sion in the reports: the paper is obli ged to

report on anyt hing Wilders actu ally does and says but his plans only

become news once he carries them into effect. It is up to the editors to

consi der whether somet hing is news rather than conclu ding up front that it

is bound to become news, for that is preci sely the reason it indeed beco mes

news (2 Febru ary 2008). He also criti ci sed the paper's mode ra tion, espe ci -

ally when in August 2007 Wilders submit ted an opinion item making a case

for banning the Koran. Next to Wilders' item the paper featu red an edito rial

denoun cing his plea. Wilders is going over board and is no longer fully

accoun ta ble, the paper wrote. On the other hand, the opinion item was

turned into news and uplif ted to the paper's lead story. The ombuds man

commen ted that the paper should not have focu sed that much atten tion on

"this utterly unre a lis tic plea that did not stand a chance from the very start".

The fact that the paper presen ted the item as a seri ous news fact, prin ting it

on the front page rather than trea ting it as an other-worldly oddity stirred

up a nationwide commotion". (25 August 2007).

Language

A primary cate gory of complaints or criti cisms in this sector pertains to the

need less use of words with a nega tive conno ta tion, such as the term sjache -

raar [cheapjack], where the author did not mean to give his arti cle such a

nega tive over tone (6 March 2004). And what about terms like murder,

elimi na tion and execu tion? Are those syno nyms? The ombuds man recom -

mends reser ving the term "execute" for everyt hing rela ted to judge ments of

the court, whereas the term "elimi nate" can be used for killings inten ded to

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 79

settle scores in the crimi nal domain and also for other forms of "killing

third parties in a syste ma tic, metho di cal, orga ni sed and violent manner",

for exam ple in Israel's combat against Hamas (19 November 2005).

Readers have commen ted on the use of expres si ons like "not until" and

"alre ady". Stating that somet hing happe ned only then or is happe ning now

alre ady gives a text a subjec tive over tone. Value-free jour na lism can only be

achie ved if just the bare facts are stated or perhaps not even then, for the

selec tion of news in itself is not free from value judge ments either (8 July

2006).

During the war between Israel and the Hezbol lah in the summer of

2006, the gene ral editors were noti ced to consis tently refer to the "Middle

East conflict", whereas the corres pon dents conti nued to use the word "war".

Why this cauti ous choice of words? "All Dutch media are care ful in their

wording whene ver the Israeli nation is invol ved. (…) I would whole he ar -

tedly advo cate apply ing equal stand ards to Israel and the rest of the world".

Apart from that, the ombuds man obser ves that "the newspa per has done an

excel lent job in repor ting the conflict: well-balan ced, fair and unbi a sed: an

extra or di nary achie ve ment consi de ring the touchi ness surroun ding

everyt hing invol ving Israel" (19 August 2006).

A head line that is perfectly correct in terms of both ling uis tics and

content can never the less impart the wrong impres sion: "Poli ce wo man

shoots and kills man at police station". The facts tally, but accor ding to the

arti cle the poli ce wo man had been stab bed twice with a knife, whereupon

she was still able to muster up enough strength and courage to shoot her

assai lant. The next day, a follow-up story repor ted that the suspect was rela -

ted to Samir A., "his famous cousin". Does a trial suddenly leave a suspect

famous, the ombuds man wonders. Why not opt for "infa mous" or

"well-known"? Famous has a rather posi tive ring to it and I can hardly

imagine that is what the editors inten ded to convey (20 October 2007).

Anot her cate gory of lang u age issues invol ves the word "Muslim" in

jour na lis tic items. The arti cle itself rela tes that members of an inter na ti o nal

crimi nal orga ni sa tion have been run in for plan ning a bomb attack. They

were not arre sted for being Muslims but for being members of a terro rist

orga ni sa tion. The ombuds man can accept the use of the word Muslim in

the head line, consi de ring the space restric ti ons. Subse quently, howe ver, the

first sentence of the arti cle should indi cate that the story invol ves terro rists

rather than Muslims over all. He repu di a tes the accu sa tion that the paper is

80 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

being stig ma ti sing by tarring Muslims and terro rists with the same brush,

except perhaps for some more or less over-simplified headlines (26 June

2004).

A few months later (13 Novem ber 2004), anot her column is devo ted to

link ing the word terro rism to Muslims and Muslim extre mism. An expres -

sion like "radi cal Muslims", even if used by the judi cial autho ri ties, should

not be adop ted without ques tion. Ever since Theo van Gogh was murde red,

the newspa per has been riddled with expres si ons like "radi cal Muslims,

terro rism, terro rist networks and jihad warri ors". Accu racy demands that

the paper refrain from using such terms when people are invol ved that are

only suspec ted of something.

A third cate gory of complaints addres ses the "cree ping Angli ci sa tion": the

incre a sing use of English words where this is quite unne ces sary, as perfectly

adequate Dutch equi va lents exist. In some cases, English is unavoi da ble,

for exam ple in an arti cle on the Inter net or the compu ter world, but foreign

words are often misspel led too. That in itself consti tu tes suffi cient reason

for the editors to give more care ful thought to the use of foreign words. And

if they use an English word nonet he less, why not include a trans la tion

between brac kets? This theme is almost a ritual dance in the ombuds man's

columns. Regu larly, he devo tes a column to Deng lish, English as spoken by

the Dutch. Discer ning readers have noti ced this and in a rather cyni cal tone

they ask: dear ombuds man, do the editors take notice of your criti cism or

will you be writing anot her column like that in a few months time? (7

August 2004, 14 April 2007, 5 January 2008).

They also complai ned about the English-lang u age supple ment with

New York Times arti cles that was inclu ded in Octo ber 2004 for a trial

period of five weeks. Accor ding to the readers, the supple ment should have

been trans la ted. The ombuds man agrees because the Volks krant is still a

Dutch-lang u age newspa per. "It is alre ady a crying shame that English words

and expres si ons conti nue to make their way into our papers, but an enti rely

English supple ment is pushing things too far". The gene ral editors should

have explai ned why trans la ting was not possi ble. Addi ti o nally, this would

have given them the oppor tu nity to clarify the scope of their final respon si -

bi lity as jour na lists. Does the editor-in-chief of the Volks krant have a say in

the compo si tion of the section and the jour na lis tic choices made? (16

October 2004).

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 81

A final cate gory of columns is about coar se ning of the lang u age, rude lang -

u age, abusive lang u age and swear words. Columns outstrip news arti cles

when it comes to using rude lang u age. Whene ver news items use such lang -

u age, it is usually in quotes and inclu ded in a report or inter view. There is

no harm in keeping out unne ces sary rude lang u age: it does not have to be

this blunt (14 Janu ary 2006).

In addi tion to coar se ning of the lang u age, readers also complai ned about

corrup tion of the lang u age and misuse of words and expres si ons. On the

one hand, it is commen da ble that the editors are incre a singly admit ting to

and recti fy ing their mista kes but on the other, it renders them vulne ra ble:

isn't the paper engaging in exces sive self-punish ment? (21 January 2006).

Do the headings cover the overtones?

Was the six-column opening head line perhaps too big, a reader wonde red.

After all, the news was not that world-shat te ring. The ombuds man consi -

ders this criti cism justi fied but appre ci a tes the choice the editors have

made. There was little other news and further more, a photo was avai la ble

concer ning that same topic (Dutch troops in Iraq). Some ti mes, the gene ral

editors have no other opti ons and have to make shift with what they have

(10 January 2004).

Many readers criti ci sed the front page head line to an arti cle by author

A.F.Th. van der Heij den about the fune ral of Prin cess Juli ana [the mother

of Queen Beat rix]: "Fare well, dear old thing, with your crown askew". The

head line was not prin ted between inver ted commas, so nothing indi ca ted

that this was in fact a quote from the author's fare well arti cle. "This puts the

readers on the wrong track". The editors should have "shown more reve -

rence and opted for a less emoti o nally char ged quote, even if this stret ched

their jour na lis tic prin ci ples" (3 April 2004).

Anot her unfor tu nate head line read: "We want Wouter", heading a major

story just prior to the muni ci pal elec ti ons. The play ful head line was devi sed

by the author himself. It did not please the ombuds man: the head line

sugge sted that "we at the Volks krant" are voting for Wouter [Bos], whereas

the paper "has been trying for quite some time now to shed its ideo lo gi cal

left-wing feat hers". Between inver ted commas, the head line would have

been accep ta ble (18 March 2006).

82 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

Readers also prote sted against the head line: "Waiting for the first to be

killed". The story discus sed the consi de ra ble risks facing the Dutch troops

in Uruzgan. The head line looks harsh but is justi fied, the ombuds man

comments (18 March 2006).

In some cases, head li nes are down right incor rect. For exam ple, the one

reading "Students support univer sity test". The arti cle indi ca ted that the

matter was not quite as unequi vo cal as the head line sugge sted. A lack of

co-ordi na tion between the day shift and the evening shift resul ted in a fail -

ure to notice the discre pancy between heading and arti cle (3 April 2004).

Anot her head line regar ded as too unequi vo cal and there fore incor rect

read "The chau vi nism of Studio Sport. NOS under growing criti cism: all

atten tion focu sed on the Nether lands". The gene ral editors did not agree

with the complaints. Initi ally, the ombuds man put both sides partly in the

right but later on, shif ted towards disap pro val: such an unequi vo cal head -

line had better been avoi ded, for it tarnis hes the paper's credi bi lity. Perhaps

the entire arti cle lacked a firm factual basis. In that case, just scrap ping it

would be prefe ra ble, he opines (28 August 2004).

Criti cism was also level led against a front page story on the image

conveyed by Prime Minis ter Balke nende. The head line impu ted a tele vi sion

issue to Mr Balke nende whereas the text brought up the matter by way of

ques tion only. That story should not have been prin ted as it was. The head -

line only blew up the nega tive image to the extreme (20 Novem ber 2004).

The year after, simi lar criti cism was direc ted against a head line to a front

page story. The head line read: "PSV foot bal lers owned by secret funds".

That head line, concoc ted without consul ting the authors of the arti cle, did

not tally. The word "secret" was not used anyw here in the arti cle and there -

fore should not have been used in the heading. It suggests somet hing

sneaky, somet hing like chea ting, which was posi ti vely out of the ques tion

here (27 August 2005).

The head line "Voters welcome third Balke nende cabi net" proved incor -

rect as well, since the arti cle indi ca ted that 62 per cent had little or no faith

in that cabi net, while only 30 per cent expres sed a great deal of faith. As the

latter percen tage surpas sed the support for the first two Balke nende cabi -

nets, this heading was prin ted above the arti cle but in fact, it is obvi ously

incor rect, the ombuds man comments (8 July 2006).

A cardi o lo gist presen ted the ombuds man with a list of incor rect

headings concer ning his profes si o nal group. The ombuds man agrees and

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 83

writes: "Often, it is the head li nes that put the readers on the wrong track.

Upon reading the stories below them, it appe ars that there are more sides to

the matter. Those head li nes, howe ver, are instru men tal in esta blis hing a

cert ain image. Thus, a profes si o nal group is driven into a corner for no

reason at all. (…) Many head li nes lack the subtle appro ach of the arti cles

below them. Usually that is no big deal, but at times it would not hurt the

paper to stop and think about the conse quen ces an overly rash summary

might have". (16 June 2007).

A head line that is correct in factual terms can still be wrong. For exam -

ple, an arti cle on the findings of two commit tees regar ding the Volks krant

torture scoop was topped by the follo wing head line: "No prose cu tion, to be

kept under cover". The line was a quote from an inter nal Defence memo

and there fore not incor rect. Sugge stive yes, for it suggests a cover-up culture

at the Minis try of Defence, while the arti cle refer red to a propo sal not to

publi cise a parti cu lar matter, a recom men da tion that had been rejec ted by

the Defence top (23 June 2007).

With or without quota tion marks, that was the issue in a contro ver sial

heading above a story repor ting, on the autho rity of the govern ment cabi -

net, that the arrest of seven alle ged terro rists had preven ted attacks. This

resul ted in the heading "Attack on poli ti ci ans and AIVD [Dutch Gene ral

Infor ma tion and Secu rity Service] thwar ted", without quota tion marks.

There fore, it reflec ted an obser va tion of the editors rather than the opinion

of the cabi net. Accor ding to the ombuds man, the editors should have left

that conclu sion to the cabi net instead of presen ting it as their own view.

Ergo, the heading should have been put between quotes (22 October 2005).

A few months later, the ombuds man encoun te red anot her head line that

should have been put between quota tion marks: "Attack on Los Ange les

foiled". It was Presi dent Bush who was respon si ble for this state ment, not

the paper (18 March 2006).

Readers also complai ned about anot her head line that actu ally had been

put between quotes. "Nice chap, no idea he was a terro rist", the heading

above an arti cle read. This quote came from one of the suspect's

neighbours. In the arti cle itself, howe ver, the neighbour clai med: "It would

never really have cros sed my mind that he of all people would have somet -

hing to do with those terro rists". In the ombuds man's opinion, this has a

slightly diffe rent ring to it compa red to the head line, which is far too

unequi vo cal (22 October 2005).

84 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

Some head li nes feature words that have been put in some o ne's mouth.

Mayor Bakker of Hilver sum was inter vie wed on the gene ral pardon. He said

he would refuse to provide the judi cial autho ri ties with infor ma tion on ille -

gal aliens not quali fy ing for the pardon. The inter view was topped by the

head line "I do not report ille gal aliens, that is trea son". Accor ding to the

arti cle, the repor ter had said: "That feels like trea son". The mayor had

agreed: "Yes, like trea son, snit ching". A reader criti ci sed that jour na lists

employ "this unde si ra ble and impro per tech ni que" incre a singly often. "You

ask a leading ques tion and the unsus pec ting inter vie wee adopts your

wording, whereupon the head line writer turns it into a 'truth'". In this case,

the ombuds man consi ders the criti cism far-fetched because the mayor

clearly respon ded in the affir ma tive and further more, had recei ved the text

for inspec tion befo re hand. Gene rally spea king, howe ver, this criti cism

holds some sense, he adds. This is somet hing to be consi de red on a case by

case basis. Public figu res who are accu sto med to dealing with the press need

less protec tion from them sel ves than others who never have to cope with

the media (7 July 2007).

Not every incor rect heading can be blamed on the head line writer. For

exam ple, the Volks krant prin ted "Link ing data on crimi nals" above a story

on link ing files. The first few para graphs were about crimi nals but accor -

ding to the second part of the story, all files were to be linked, not just those

pertai ning to crimi nals. This makes the head line exte nu a ting, readers

claim, for the plan is "scarier and even less desi ra ble". The ombuds man

comments that the reader is right but in his opinion, the head line writer is

not to blame, as "head li nes are usually writ ten on the basis of the first few

para graphs of an arti cle. And these focu sed on crimi nals". In fact, the

author should have rever sed the order of his story; no doubt that would

have produ ced a more appropri ate head line, the ombuds man concludes

(10 November 2007).

Covering different aspects of an issue

Boris Dittrich, leader of the parli a men tary party D66, applauds the plan of

intro du cing a combi ned members hip for the VVD and D66 parties, the

Volks krant prin ted promi nently on its front page. On his website, Dittrich

called it "sheer nonsense". The jour na list had quoted him in his arti cle

without actu ally having spoken to him. Instead of calling, the jour na list,

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 85

pres sed for time, had just put these words into his mouth after a reli a ble

source within D66, "who has never let me down yet", had confir med the

state ment. The ombuds man regards this as a "jour na lis tic mortal sin";

anyt hing as funda men tal as that should always be chec ked with the origi na -

tor. Further more, the jour na list had assu med respon si bi lity for Dittrich's

view rather than leaving it to the respon si bi lity of his anony mous source.

Lack of time is no excuse: the story allo wed eight people say their bit and the

repor ter could have mana ged to squeeze in a telep hone call to Dittrich (7

February 2004).

The series of reports on and with Bert and Marja in the Diamant buurt,

one of Amster dam's multi cul tu ral neighbour hoods, struck home from a

jour na lis tic point of view. Loite ring teens peste red the family until they left

the neighbour hood. The series raised the ques tion in the ombuds man's

mind "whether the editors were not rather biased in just siding with the

poor inno cent Dutch white victims haras sed by evil Moroc can young sters".

Shouldn't the repor ter have spoken to those young sters too? He had indeed

made several attempts but recei ved hardly any decent answers. Why then

did he not explain this to the readers, the ombuds man wonders (20 October

2004).

The Style Book stipu la tes that anony mous accu sa ti ons or nega tive

quali fi ca ti ons always call for hearing both sides of an issue. Why then did

the paper fail to ask the Prime Minis ter for a reac tion when several key offi -

ci als level led severe criti cism against the cabi net's commu ni ca ti ons policy,

anony mously, on the front page? (27 November 2004).

And when have both sides been suffi ciently heard? Why did the paper

not ask those invol ved for a reac tion when it publis hed a back ground arti cle

about the turmoil within the GroenLinks party? The story presen ted

Karimi ("former member of a terro rist orga ni sa tion in Iran") and Duyven -

dak ("former mentor to terro rist groups") as MPs with a ques ti o na ble past.

The party chair, when asked for a reac tion, clai med nothing was wrong.

Accor ding to the ombuds man, those invol ved should have been given the

oppor tu nity to respond to the alle ga ti ons in the paper. Refrai ning from

repro du cing such quali fi ca ti ons until they have been proven would be even

better. The ombuds man refers to "an unfor tu nate course of events" but

without "malice aforethought" (10 December 2005).

Is it alright to repro duce an accu sa tion in a book without chec king? The

paper prin ted a news item about and an inter view with a French econo mist

86 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

who was writing a book on fair trade. He commen ted that the Max Have laar

quality mark did not func tion properly; little check is kept and a lot is going

wrong. In an aside, he remar ked that a Dutch coffee impor ter had engaged

in frau du lent acti vi ties. The jour na list inclu ded that remark in her story

because she thought it would inte rest the readers. The ombuds man states

that "a jour na list who repro du ces such alle ga ti ons should at least hear the

accu sed's side of the story. A single telep hone call would have suffi ced to

that end". Further more, it turns out that there are only nine Max Have laar

coffee impor ters in the Nether lands. Undoub tedly, the repor ter did not

mean to put other coffee impor ters in a bad light, the ombuds man conclu -

des but the fact is that such a side remark does more damage than necessary

(26 August 2006).

Is it alright to use a second-hand quote? No, says the ombuds man, you

need to at least refe rence that quote to its source and further more, ask the

person invol ved to comment. Some of the team working on the contro ver -

sial Zembla docu men tary De heilige Ayaan [The Holy Ayaan] were in the

Hague to show Ayaan Hirsi Ali their rough mate rial and record her

response to the foot age on film. After wards, direc tor Jos van Dongen alle -

gedly said: "As a matter of fact it is a pity that you agreed to co-operate". A

refu sal would have suited him better. This is what two Volks krant repor ters

clai med in their book De orkaan Ayaan [Hurri cane Ayaan] and its prepu -

bli ca tion in the newspa per. Hirsi Ali and her assis tants had told them. The

Zembla crew denied that such remarks had been made. Accor ding to the

ombuds man, the alle ga tion should have at least been presen ted to Van

Dongen, if only because it is his inte grity as a jour na list that is being ques ti -

o ned. Now, the state ment is presen ted as a fact. This is not how it should be;

both parties' versi ons should have been reflec ted in the prepu bli ca tion, in

order to allow the readers to judge for themselves (25 November 2006).

Should a review consi der both sides as well? Member of the Euro pean

Parli a ment Els de Groen wrote a novel, based on her own expe rien ces,

about frau du lent prac ti ces by NGOs in the former Eastern bloc. The

heading above the review read "Merce des purcha sed with Novib money".

Novib complai ned to the ombuds man that this unde ser vedly put the orga -

ni sa tion in a bad light. "The revie wer's duty of care does not extend to veri -

fy ing every fact in the book with the persons and orga ni sa ti ons the book

refers to. If anyone should take on this task, it should be the author of the

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 87

book or the publis her," the ombuds man comments. The newspa per can

confine itself to discus sing the contents (16 December 2006).

Many eyebrows were raised over the inter view Pieter Broer tjes and Jan

Tromp had with Prince Bern hard, which was publis hed after his death.

Proba bly the biggest scoop in the history of the Volks krant. A few months

before, the paper had prin ted an open letter from the Prince. The ombuds -

man vents a criti cal comment on that letter: "the many indis pu ta ble issues

the Prince could postu late unchal lenged remai ned unre fu ted". The inter -

view was a risky project because those invol ved needed to main tain strict

secrecy for quite some time and leakage remai ned a conti nual possi bi lity. In

this case, the end justi fied the means, the ombuds man opined but such

methods should not become gene rally accep ted. Further more, they should

not prevent the editors from hearing both sides of an issue and look ing for

answers to all the ques ti ons raised (18 December 2004).

"Medi cal wizard proven not to be a doctor" read a head line to an arti cle

about a Dutchman perfor ming ortho pae dic surgery in a German clinic and

inter vie wing patients in the Nether lands. The report was based on a state -

ment by the Healthcare Inspec to rate, which had initi a ted an inves ti ga tion

in response to complaints from patients. Appa rently, the person invol ved

was not regis te red on the BIG, the Dutch regis ter of healthcare profes si o -

nals. This promp ted the head line writer to conclude that the man in ques -

tion was not a doctor. The paper failed to contact him directly. Was the

repor ter right in depen ding on the Inspec to rate or should she have contac -

ted the man to hear his side? Accor ding to the ombuds man, "reques ting the

man to comment would have been more prudent". After all, the item repro -

du ced an accu sa tion that could damage someone's reputation.

A simi lar case invol ved an arti cle about bedso res, based on an arti cle in

Medisch Contact [Medi cal Contact] and an inter view with the author, an

expert in the field of decu bi tus. One of the issues discus sed in the inter view

was the fact that decu bi tus figu res are being rigged by cate go ri sing matters

diffe rently. The UMC Radboud hospi tal also came up, not in rela tion to

rigging but on account of a new treat ment method. Yet the hospi tal felt that

the repor ter should have asked them to comment, as its repu ta tion was

thrown away by being linked to rigged figu res. In the repor ter's opinion, it

was not neces sary to let them have their say; she did not accuse anyone and

further more, her story was based on a reli a ble source. Accor ding to the

ombuds man, allo wing the hospi tal to comment was indeed called for, as the

88 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

tenor of the arti cle was quite nega tive and it only menti o ned a single insti -

tu tion by name. In such a case, the repor ter should have given the hospi tal

the oppor tu nity to react and refute the criti cism. In a more gene ral sense,

the ombuds man remarks that "hearing the other side does not alter the arti -

cle, at most it adds anot her opinion. Subse quently, it is up to the readers to

draw conclu si ons, somet hing they are quite capable of doing". (3 February

2007).

Reflec ting both sides of an issue does not mean that the truth is brought

out, as was found after the paper had publis hed a number of arti cles on

CDA sena tor and former State Secre tary René van der Linden, Chair of the

Parli a men tary Assem bly of the Coun cil of Europe. The arti cle stated,

among other things, that during a working visit to Russia the poli ti ci an's

poli ti cal inte rests had conflic ted with his perso nal ones. He had laid the

foun da tion stone for the construc tion of a logis tics park. Accor ding to the

repor ter, the construc tion compa ny's website indi ca ted that Van der Linden

was a "super vi sor" for this project. Van der Linden, when asked to comment

befo re hand, replied that this was not true, he did not have any busi ness

inte rests in Russia and his name should never have been menti o ned on that

site. Isn't that somet hing a jour na list should inves ti gate before his story is

publis hed, the ombuds man wonders. Or does it suffice to mention this

conflict of inte rests in order to subse quently have it denied by the person

invol ved? The ombuds man "has his doubts". "In my view, this has been

blown up out of propor tion. It is presen ted like somet hing terri ble has

happe ned but lacks a firm factual basis". What is the value of a story stating

somet hing that is denied by the person involved? (17 November 2007).

The lions in Blij dorp zoo are swit ching to fully vege ta rian feed, the

paper repor ted. The head line to the ANP item read "Only lettuce for Blij -

dorp lions". The editors suspec ted an April fool's joke but prin ted the report

nonet he less. Subse quently, it turned out to be a hoax indeed. Howe ver

succes sful this joke was, accor ding to the ombuds man the editors deser ved

part of the blame. A single telep hone call to an expert would have taught

them that lions cannot survive on lettuce alone (5 April 2008).

Photographs

The theme of photo graphs has alre ady been touched upon above, in the

section on mode ra tion and the protec tion of privacy, espe ci ally that of

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 89

suspects. Other aspects include the prin ting of stock photos and the unple -

a sant conse quen ces that may have, shoc king photos readers do not appre -

ci ate and sugge stive photos.

In his column of 15 July 2006, the ombuds man tackles the problem of

finding a suit able photo to go with a story. In some cases this proves to be a

fiasco, for exam ple when a story on fraud in dentis try is illu stra ted by a

stock photo of a dentist made for an enti rely diffe rent purpose. It would

alre ady make a big diffe rence if the caption were to state that the persons in

the photo bear no rela tion to the persons in the story. It would be even

better "if every single photo was provi ded with credits stating clearly when

it was made and for what purpose. This preclu des embar ras sing mista kes

that can cause exten sive damage or perso nal grief ".

Anot her mishap follo wed when a stock photo was prin ted with an arti -

cle on psycho lo gists stri ving for autho ri sa tion to pres cribe medi ca ti ons.

The story inclu ded a photo from a photo press agency, showing two women

in conver sa tion. Accor ding to the caption, a psychot he ra pist and one of her

patients. The psycho lo gist turned out to be a social worker. In the photog -

rap her's view, "she looked like a psycho lo gist", which he there fore refe ren -

ced in the caption. Subse quently, it was adop ted by the Volks krant. The

paper is not to blame, although accor ding to the ombuds man the caption

should have menti o ned that it concer ned an old stock photo that had been

staged. The latter was repor ted in the descrip tion provi ded by the photo

press agency (15 March 2008).

Many readers react when the paper publis hes shoc king images, for exam ple

of Saddam Hussein's execu tion. "Often, we are quite reti cent," the gene ral

editors remark, "but this was such a big news item. In addi tion, the images

had been on view the entire week end. They show a reality that is maca bre

and horri fic but we cannot pretend it does not exist. Further more, the ille -

gal images added somet hing; they became the object of the news. A paper

must be bold enough to show the less uplif ting sides of huma nity". The

ombuds man wonders whether it was neces sary to print the photo on the

front page. "I could have imagi ned anot her choice". Then, on the other

hand, the repro ach of hypo crisy lurks: why not on the front page, while

hidden away inside the paper would be accep ta ble? A jour na lis tic justi fi ca -

tion by the gene ral editors would have been in order here (13 January

2007).

90 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

During that same period of time, the Maga zine featu red ten pages of

photos and text about the duties of a police photog rap her and the horrors

he encoun ters. The pictu res came from a book and an exhi bi tion set up by

the Amster dam police. Here too the readers were shoc ked. The Maga zine

editors deci ded to print the photos because they showed an aspect of the

police photog rap her's work that had not been expo sed before. In addi tion,

the police had assu red them that "the victims portrayed did not have any

survi ving rela ti ves who could be shoc ked by these images". The ombuds -

man wonders why they did not just state so in the capti ons. Somet hing else

that was lacking here too was a jour na lis tic justi fi ca tion of the reasons why.

With slightly more of an expla na tion the editors could have dispel led the

impres sion that they deli be ra tely inten ded to shock the readers (13 January

2007).

Citi zen jour na lism has also made its way into the Volks krant columns.

This came to light when the front page featu red a photo of two fighting

men, an anti-fascist protes ter and a member of an ultra-right group. The

final sentence of the caption read: "Photo taken by a bystan der". Readers

wonde red how the paper could vouch for the reli a bi lity of the infor ma tion

provi ded. The photo editors had asses sed the quality of the picture and

addi ti o nally made every effort to trace the origin of the photo through the

ANP. The ombuds man shares the expec ta tion that the volume of amateur

pictu res will incre ase. It is a trend that cannot be stop ped and that in itself

holds no harm, as long as the photo editors make clear compa ra tive asses -

sments and select for quality (3 March 2007).

The arti cle under the heading of "Report on inter ro ga ti ons in Iraq does

not preclude tortu res" featu red a photo of Guantánamo Bay. Readers consi -

de red this inap propri ate because it impli citly suggests that Guantánamo

Bay engages in torture as well. If this is what the paper belie ves, it should say

so. The ombuds man puts the complai ner in the right: the picture did not

belong there. Further more, prin ting such pictu res contra ve nes the policy of

not inclu ding pictu res of Abu Ghraib or Guantánamo Bay with opinion

items on alle ged torture prac ti ces by Dutch troops, preci sely in order to

avoid any sugge stion of this sort. The problem is that for some topics there

is hardly any suit able visual mate rial avai la ble. Any pictu res to illu strate

such arti cles are likely to misfire (7 July 2007).

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 91

Letters to the editor

Every year, the editors receive some thirty thou sand letters and emails, of

which some ten per cent is actu ally prin ted. This incurs consi de ra ble

disple a sure amongst those whose letters are not prin ted. Their rejec tion is

commu ni ca ted by way of a stand ard note. Some faithful letter writers

suspect censors hip when they receive yet anot her rejec tion. The ombuds -

man explains which letters are most likely to be accep ted: not too leng thy,

dealing with topi cal issues and adding somet hing to the forming of ideas or

discus sion. Criti cal letters concer ning the content of the newspa per and

jour na lis tic choi ces are always welcome too. This does not mean, howe ver,

that every criti cal letter will be prin ted (31 Janu ary 2004 and 14 October

2006).

When the front page featu red a story under the heading "PSV foot bal -

lers owned by secret funds", much of the media imme di a tely called out that

it did not tally because there were no secret funds what soe ver. A few days

later, the paper prin ted a letter to the editor stating this was all old news. The

paper prin ted the letter reaso ning that this is somet hing a paper should be

broad-minded about: if this is what a reader feels, it should not be tucked

away. But what then if the content of such a letter does not (enti rely) square

with the facts? It would detract from a good story and damage the repu ta -

tion of the repor ters (27 August 2005).

The theme returns: criti cal letters are alright, welco med even, but what

if a letter vents unjus ti fied criti cism? The editors state that prin ting does

not signify agree ment with the writer's views, but readers often reason that

there should be some truth in the letter, other wise the editors would not

have prin ted it, would they? Whene ver a reader holds a deba ta ble view, for

exam ple, far too little atten tion for a parti cu lar topic that has indeed been

cove red, even repe a tedly, in the paper, the ombuds man would recom mend

sending that reader an over view of all arti cles pertai ning to that parti cu lar

theme. It entails far more work but does more justice to the editors. "The

letters section should reflect inte res ting obser va ti ons, ideas and opini ons. It

is not inten ded to rectify mista kes or remedy jour na lis tic short co mings.

That would only raise more ques ti ons among other readers". (15 October

2005).

Some letters turn out not to have been writ ten by the person whose

signa ture they bear. In the opinion of the ombuds man, readers should not

92 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

only state their name and domi cile in their letters, but also their address and

telep hone number. This would faci li tate spot chec king by the editors. What

would be even better is to have all the letters that are prin ted (some sixty a

week) follo wed-up by telep hone. Although this would require more work,

it redu ces the risk of mista kes and deli be rate decep tion (25 Febru ary 2006).

In his next column the ombuds man returns to this subject. A reader

repor ted that all his letters are writ ten under a pseu do nym because signing

his real name has caused him a lot of trou ble in the past. Other readers

would look up his number in the telep hone direc tory and bother him

because they did not agree with the content of his letter. This inci ted him to

start using a pseu do nym. Accor ding to the ombuds man this is unac cep ta -

ble, howe ver under stand able it may be. Anyone parti ci pa ting in a debate

needs to be open and above board. Anyone who does not want that, does

not belong on the letters page. And with a cert ain cyni cal under tone he

adds: "Let him have his way on the Inter net, where anony mity and alia ses

seem to be more and more of a prer equi site for forming an opinion". (4

March 2006).

Three weeks later, the paper has imple men ted a new policy: letters and

emails must bear name, address and telep hone number. This is chec ked at

random. All this in order for the paper to avoid having to rectify letters

whose writers have signed a diffe rent name (25 March 2006).

Three months later, the ombuds man menti ons a new section in the

prin ted paper: "letter of the day". On the website, the editors select a letter

every day to which visi tors may respond. The nicest or most inte res ting

reac ti ons will be inclu ded in the prin ted paper as well. The problem is that

customs differ on the Inter net. Anony mous or pseu do ny mous opini ons are

perfectly normal here. Last names are usually omit ted. Yet the newspa per

has clear rules that also apply to its website: name, domi cile and telep hone

number. The editors them sel ves bent this rule when they were short of

regu la tion reac ti ons. The ombuds man consi ders this under stand able but

ill-advi sed. Strict terms and condi ti ons in the paper should also be obser -

ved on the website. There is no explai ning double stand ards. If this means

that the "letter of the day" section will be scrap ped for lack of usable reac ti -

ons, "so be it; it would be an unfor tu nate but unavoi da ble conse quence of

our own rules". No section at all would be prefe ra ble to one that is out of

control. Anyone wishing to parti ci pate in the debate must do so in the open.

The gene ral editors now share this view (17 June 2006).

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 93

Reply

In three columns, the ombuds man addres ses the right to reply. In an inter -

view, Minis ter Van Ardenne of Deve lop ment Co-opera tion level led fierce

criti cism at Plan Neder land, an orga ni sa tion that uses funding provi ded by

the Dutch govern ment to arrange for orpha ned chil dren to grow up in their

native coun try rather than being adop ted. The Minis ter criti ci sed the orga -

ni sa ti on's func ti o ning, clai ming that they were taking too much control

instead of placing respon si bi li ties in the hands of the local popu la tion.

Conse quently, the Minis ter cut off their subsi dies. Plan Neder land respon -

ded with a furi ous letter to the paper, which was not prin ted, "because it is

the paper's stand ard prac tice that letters to the editor should not be used to

right alle ged wrongs. Mista kes are recti fied and not seemingly correc ted in

a letter". A recti fi ca tion, howe ver, was not forthco ming either. The Minis -

ter vented her opinion in an inter view and she is entit led to do so, even if, in

the opinion of the accused, this constitutes misrepresentation.

What about a rule giving some one who is accu sed the right to defend

himself, the ombuds man wonders. In fact, the editors would have to them -

sel ves inves ti gate alle ga ti ons voiced in an inter view before the inter view

was prin ted (11 Novem ber 2006).

A few weeks later (30 Decem ber 2006), a simi lar inci dent took place.

Defence Minis ter Kamp accu sed the Volks krant of misquo ting him in a

parli a men tary debate and reque sted a recti fi ca tion. The paper did not

rectify because the repor ters insi sted that the Minis ter had said what was

prin ted in the paper. In addi tion, Minis ter Kamp reac ted to an inter view

with editor-in-chief Broer tjes in HP De Tijd. In that inter view, Broer tjes

said that the paper should either not have used the word "torture" or have

put it between brac kets in its reports on the alle ged miscon duct of Dutch

troops in Iraq (the "torture affair"). Accor ding to Minis ter Kamp, the

editor-in-chief should have recti fied this in his own paper too, but that did

not happen either.

In the ombuds man's opinion, Minis ter Kamp "touches a sore spot" with

his request to rectify or print a letter to the editor. "Some one who feels he

has been misquo ted gene rally has few opti ons for venting his views to the

readers. The complai ner's hands are tied if the editors conti nue to refuse to

print a letter. Recti fi ca tion can only be enfor ced through the courts but that

is a rather severe instru ment. A solu tion could be for the editors to allo cate

94 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

some room, other than the recti fi ca ti ons section, for retorts from anyone

feeling they have been misquo ted". Appa rently he is somew hat hesi tant, for

he then comments that the remedy may prove worse than the dise ase, when

people start to use such a section to tone down or read just any statement

they regret.

Yet, a few months later (8 Septem ber 2007), the hesi ta ti ons have dimi -

nis hed. The ombuds man refers to "an incre a singly recur rent dilemma".

Some one is inter vie wed or portrayed in the newspa per and subse quently

claims that the repor ters have misre pre sen ted cert ain aspects. He then

requests the paper to print a recti fi ca tion or a letter to the editor. If the

paper refu ses, there is not much he can do. Occa si o nally, some one gives a

compre hen sive inter view only to find that only a few lines are used in the

arti cle. In such cases too the person invol ved feels chea ted, although the

facts tally, because expec ta ti ons have been arou sed that have not been

fulfilled.

This problem could be solved by setting up a sepa rate reply section, for

exam ple, on a monthly basis, as an iden ti fi a ble page apart from the "stand -

ard page with letters to the editor". The editors would then not detract from

their own arti cle, while the person feeling wronged would still have an

oppor tu nity to vent his view.

Authorisation

The inter vie wee for his part can also take precau ti ons to prevent his state -

ments from being misquo ted in the paper. Such precau ti ons relate to the

right of inspec tion before publi ca tion and autho ri sa tion. This theme is

addres sed in four columns. In the first (19 March 2005), the ombuds man

focu ses on explai ning stand ard proce du res in jour na lism. Virtu ally every

inter vie wee is given the oppor tu nity of viewing the text or at least the

quotes befo re hand. This guaran tees the jour na list that there will be no

hassle after wards, while the inter vie wee can rectify factual inac cu ra cies and

misin ter pre ted state ments. But what if trou ble arises nonet he less? Who

actu ally owns the inter view? The Dutch Press Coun cil has once and again

ruled on the rights of inter vie wees. In jour na lis tic terms, using a quote in a

manner other than had been promi sed may consti tute care les sness. If a

jour na list promi ses a posi tive arti cle, he should come through. If the tenor

of the arti cle changes, he should again request permis sion to use the quote.

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 95

Some one who is presen ted in a highly perso nal and iden ti fi a ble fashion in a

story has the right to stipu late that the conversation be rendered in a

manner acceptable to him.

Conse quently, a lot depends on the agree ments that have been made.

Does inspec ting entail the right to make changes? Correc ting factual inac -

cu ra cies is not quite the same as chang ing the tenor of the arti cle. Further -

more, some one who is menti o ned by name in the paper is more entit led to

speak than some one who is presen ted in an anony mous or uniden ti fi a ble

fashion. In the latter case, the cour tesy of the jour na list plays a major part.

On 1 July 2006 the ombuds man discus sed an inter view with Trichet,

chair of the Euro pean Central Bank. His atten tion was drawn not to the

inter view but to the box along side, in which the editors outli ned the condi -

ti ons on which the inter view had been conduc ted. Four jour na lists from

diffe rent coun tries had been invi ted. Ques ti ons had to be submit ted in

advance. The papers could only print at a time to be deter mi ned by the ECB

and further more, each paper was to print exactly the same text. In addi tion,

the bank deman ded (and was gran ted) the right to make funda men tal

changes in the text.

The ombuds man states that he finds this method of working hard to

swal low ("slip pery slope"). It is highly compa ra ble to the "embed ded jour -

na lism" in Uruzgan. Readers do not know what ques ti ons have been asked,

what has been stric ken and what has been altered.

In Janu ary 2008 two columns (19 and 26 Janu ary 2008) were devo ted to

the autho ri sa tion of inter views and reports. The ombuds man points out

that the prac tice of inspec ting befo re hand has mean while become a matter

of course. The Press Coun cil has also issued some state ments in this regard,

for exam ple that the context of the quotes plays a role too. If the tenor of an

arti cle changes, the inter vie wees need to grant permis sion once again. What

does that entail for a jour na list who speaks to some ten people for a report

and who at the time of the inter views does not yet know where his final

story will bring him? Can all infor mers withdraw their permis sion because

they are not satis fied with the context in which their quotes have ended up?

In the second column, the ombuds man takes the posi tion that his paper

should refrain from auto ma ti cally submit ting arti cles for autho ri sa tion.

"Pre-showing some one the text of a compre hen sive inter view, for which

you have spent hours talking, is one thing and perfectly justi fi a ble, but a

short conver sa tion or brief inter view should no longer be autho ri sed". The

96 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

conse quence will be that poli ti ci ans and admi ni stra tors will steer clear of

the paper, at least for a while but so be it. Jour na lists can be expec ted to be

profes si o nal. This means, among other things, that quotes are rende red

correctly and in the proper context. It also means that mista kes are admit -

ted broad-mindedly and rectified.

Rectifications

It goes without saying that the subject of recti fy ing mista kes is also addres -

sed in a number of columns, eight to be exact. For a number of years, the

paper "has pursued a policy of broad-mindedly admit ting to mista kes,

prefe ra bly recti fy ing them as quic kly as possi ble" (10 Janu ary 2004). The

number of "in errors" has incre a sed, not because more mista kes are being

made but because of an incre a sed willing ness to admit to their own errors.

The ombuds man points to the even more libe ral recti fi ca ti ons policy

pursued by some British and Ameri can papers. In a newspa per like the St.

Peters burg Times, a daily eye-catching box calls on its readers to report

mistakes.

Only three months later (10 April 2004), the ombuds man reports that

the Volks krant will be follo wing that same line, prima rily at the insti ga tion

of the previ ous ombuds man, who upon his resig na tion once again empha -

ti cally insi sted on such a policy. The Abuis [In error] section will be repla -

ced by Aanvul lingen & verbe te ringen [Addi ti ons & Correc ti ons] "which

will rectify and explain not only real mista kes but also minor inac cu ra cies

and omis si ons". Some readers reac ted enthu sed, others were cyni cal

because the actual prac tice differs from the paper reality: substan tial factual

correc ti ons are rari ties in a paper! The ombuds man himself points to an

ingrai ned pattern among the editors: they either wait for the readers to

react and then print one of the letters submit ted or they report the correct

facts in a follow-up arti cle, whereupon they proceed to the order of the day.

The ombuds man calls this an "objec ti o na ble proce dure". For exam ple, the

editors opted for a news item rather than a recti fi ca tion when they had to

correct their mistake that D66 was open to close co-opera tion with the

VVD party. The jour na list quoted D66 leader Dittrich without actually

having contacted him (7 February 2004).

Nearly a year later (12 Febru ary 2005), he obser ves that the libe ral recti -

fi ca ti ons policy is resul ting in a remar ka ble amount of addi ti ons or correc -

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 97

ti ons. This causes readers to ques tion the reli a bi lity of the paper: "If the

paper does not even take the trou ble to spell names correctly, how reli a ble

will the rest of the story be?" Anot her year later (25 March 2006), he reports

that the number of recti fi ca ti ons has stabi li sed. After nearly two years (12

Janu ary 2008) the number of mista kes turns out to have fallen for the third

year in a row. "This seems to justify the cauti ous conclu sion that the editors

have been exer ci sing more care". Three types of mista kes top the list:

misspel led names, inac cu ra cies and incor rect petty details. Editors also

blun der quite frequently in terms of geography, the survey showed.

In many cases, it is the super la ti ves used ("first, largest, oldest") that have

to be recti fied because the unique ness turned out not to be unique at all.

There fore, reti cence is called for when using super la ti ves (3 Decem ber

2005).

The column of 10 June 2006 discus ses a mistake in an arti cle that is

recti fied in the prin ted paper but not on the website or in the digi tal archi -

ves. The policy stipu la tes that recti fi ca ti ons are to be carried through in all

cases, to accom pany the origi nal text which is addi ti o nally marked with a

comment indi ca ting that the report has been recti fied. Yet on the Inter net

mista kes some ti mes linger on without correc ti ons. Howe ver, these rules do

not apply to anyt hing appe a ring on the website only, an "undesirable

situation".

Mista kes have to be correc ted where they have been made, policy stipu -

la tes. In the paper, on the website or on vk.tv. Other wise, readers will be

faced with a find-the-mistake puzzle. For that reason, the website should

have a correc ti ons section, as does the daily PDF paper the editors put on

the net every day at four PM.

State ments also need to be recti fied when misquo ting third parties. For

exam ple, Geert Wilders asser ted that he fully agreed with the Pope, viz.

about the Islam being a violent reli gion. The paper prin ted this quote in the

head li nes to the arti cle. It subse quently turned out that the Pope had phra -

sed and cert ainly inten ded this diffe rently. By not recti fy ing this, the paper

contri bu ted to the disse mi na tion of a false hood that remains uncon te sted

(21 October 2006).

Should the paper still rectify after the ombuds man has admit ted in his

column that mista kes were made and that there fore, the complaint is justi -

fied (16 Febru ary 2008)? Yes, the Press Coun cil states, because the ombuds -

man is inde pen dent and does not belong to the edito rial staff. The editors,

98 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

there fore, should put on the hair shirt them sel ves and admit their mistake

in the edito rial section (Press Coun cil 2007/74). No, the ombuds man states,

because the editors have alre ady admit ted to the mista kes when the

ombuds man called them to account during his inves ti ga tion into the

complaint. With a subse quent public report to that effect by the ombuds -

man in his column (1 Septem ber 2007), the complai ner has obtained his

satisfaction.

Editorial independence

With regard to press trips, the Style Book stipu la tes that invi ta ti ons can

only be accep ted with permis sion from the gene ral editors and that the trip

must serve a jour na lis tic purpose. In prin ci ple, the newspa per takes care of

the accom mo da tion expen ses. It would be prefe ra ble, accor ding to the

ombuds man, if all travel and accom mo da tion expen ses were paid by the

newspa per. It would then be up to the paper to assess whether trips are rele -

vant or not, which would make any discus sion on its deci sion an inter nal

one. On the other hand, many trips yiel ding valu a ble contacts and infor ma -

tion would become prohi bi ti vely expen sive. In the long term, this is not

condu cive to the gathe ring of news. The costs of abso lute inde pen dence are

prohi bi tive as well. A good solu tion would be to exer cise abso lute open -

ness: from whom does the invi ta tion origi nate, what purpose does the trip

serve and who is paying for it? (15 May 2004).

The ample edito rial atten tion to Philips' new sales campaign "Sense and

simpli city", in combi na tion with the concern's size a ble adverts has raised

ques ti ons among the readers: why print this on the front page? Was there no

other news? Do you report each new slogan or only if it is backed by heavy

adver ti sing? Have the editors struck a bargain with the adver ti sing depart -

ment? The ombuds man comments that econo mic news is often agenda

news, arri ving at the same time for media over all because compa nies are

bound by rules aimed at preven ting insi der trading. Thus, jour na lism can

only assume a follo wing role here. Somet hing the Volks krant could have

done is come up with its own line of appro ach to the Philips news, for

exam ple contac ting marke ting experts on the new Philips slogan. This fell

through (18 September 2004).

Adver ti se ments must be unre la ted to edito rial atten tion paid to a

company or product, the ombuds man writes on 9 Octo ber 2004. Every

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 99

sugge stion of a conflict of inte rests must be avoi ded. The reason for poin -

ting this out was a special book page by Meulen hoff publis hers, laid out like

an edito rial page. Isn't this putting the readers on the wrong track? "If the

editors are intent on keeping the newspa per affor da ble for its readers, they

must be prepa red to think about new publis hing acti vi ties and if need be,

give up some ground. That has alre ady been effec ted by admit ting more

adver ti se ments on edito rial pages, which used to be unthink able. As long as

the line is clear and it is the gene ral editors who are drawing the line, I do

not see any harm in that".

An adver ti sing supple ment enclo sed early Novem ber 2005 was deemed

inap propri ate by the ombuds man. The supple ment invol ved "a special on

teeth, prin ted in almost exactly the same font as the paper, complete with

inter views, reports and back ground, as if it were an edito rial supple ment".

Although marked "adver ti sing supple ment", it never the less conveyed the

impres sion that it was part of the paper. The publis her consi de red it unac -

cep ta ble as well. The supple ment only reve a led its true nature during the

prin ting process, past the point of no return. The paper has learnt its lesson

(4 November 2006).

A few months before (26 March 2005), the ombuds man had devo ted

anot her column to readers annoyed by aggres sive adver ti sing in the most

promi nent of spots and a self-pros ti tu ting newspa per. The ombuds man

comments that in recent times adver ti sers have been given more space in

the edito rial pages. The fact is that a newspa per cannot do without adver ti -

se ments but the adver ti sers have no influ ence on edito rial policy. Further -

more, the gene ral editors can always refuse an advert. Adver ti se ments must

always be iden ti fi a ble as such. An occa si o nal misfire can usually be attri bu -

ted to an unfor tu nate coin ci dence rather than well-consi de red policy. And

condi ti o nal sales of edito rial and commer cial atten tion are not in anybody's

interest at all.

Many readers also criti ci sed CaMu's appe a rance in Post bank TV

commer ci als. Can Remco Campert and Jan Mulder still be consi de red

Volks krant, now that they have succum bed to the big money? Both colum -

nists are inde pen dent and there fore, the editor-in-chief cannot tell them

what to do or not do. What he could do, is termi nate the asso ci a tion with

these two gent le men because appa rently, they have lost their credi bi lity

with a propor tion of the readers. There is yet anot her aspect: now that both

Campert and Mulder are appe a ring in the commer ci als, taking turns reci -

100 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

ting their lines, it is sugge sted that this is a CaMu perfor mance. That duo is

the spiri tual property of editor-in-chief Broer tjes, for he is the one who

came up with this formula. On the other hand, they are free lan cing. The

ombuds man propo ses draf ting a code of conduct, by analogy with the code

of conduct for edito rial staff, for "contri bu tors and colum nists that are vital

to the paper's image, espe ci ally if in the readers' mind they are inex tri ca bly

bound up with the paper". Such a code would have to include a stipu la tion

prohi bi ting them from engaging in acti vi ties with the compe ti tion simi lar

to what they are doing for the Volks krant, for exam ple, writing a column.

Thus, CaMu in Post bank tele vi sion commercials would be unacceptable (2

July 2005).

Transparency and accountability

In an opinion item, a univer sity profes sor makes a plea for the protec tion of

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, even abroad. Shouldn't he have menti o ned that he used to

have a rela ti ons hip with the poli ti cian, as his own books indi cate? And

shouldn't a colum nist writing on that same theme have menti o ned that he

is a friend of Hirsi Ali's? Shouldn't a sports repor ter have menti o ned that a

table-tennis player featu ring in his arti cles is his own wife? Or is there no

need for the readers to know all this and is the strength of the story itself the

only thing that matters? Or is the rati o nale that the paper and thus its

readers only profit from friendly rela ti ons between jour na lists and those

about whom they write? Accor ding to the ombuds man, not menti o ning

these rela ti ons hips depri ves the readers. "Editors making a great song and

dance about trans pa rency, judging every one and arguing for full disclo sure

of all the facts, should them sel ves be the first to exer cise transparency". (8

March 2008).

Somew hat simi lar is a situ a tion descri bed earlier (21 Febru ary 2004), an

opinion item in which free lance jour na list Jan Kuiten brou wer levels fierce

criti cism against the Kijkwij zer [tele vi sion content rating system], voicing

that same criti cisms in his column Heden lands [Contem po rary Dutch] and

his weblog on the Volks krant site, using expres si ons like "we at the Volks -

krant", while in fact he is no Volks krant jour na list but works free lance.

Shouldn't he state that more unequi vo cally? Can some one who writes an

opinion item use his Volks krant weblog to justify himself?

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 101

Whereas the items above mainly pertain to trans pa rency, the next ones

focus on accoun ta bi lity. In April 2005, the Volks krant prin ted an arti cle

clai ming that Prime Minis ter Kok had stop ped Queen Beat rix without

giving any reasons when during a state visit, she wanted to apolo gise for the

acti ons of the Dutch troops during the mili tary offen si ves aimed at

suppres sing the Indo ne sian nati o nal revo lu tion. AD jour na list Redmar

Kooi stra wrote an opinion item postu la ting that this was old news, as he

had alre ady menti o ned this in a book. The ombuds man agrees, albeit that

Kooi stra posses sed confi den tial infor ma tion, whereas the Volks krant attri -

bu ted its infor ma tion to Jan Pronk, among others. In his opinion, the paper

should have been more clear in its account: if this was old news, it should

have been stated frankly. And if it was not old news, the opinion item

should have said so (30 April 2005).

Repor ters basing a story on anony mous sour ces should also state why

they opted for this unusual proce dure. Although the readers will not be able

to verify the infor ma tion, they will at least have some idea of how the story

has come into being. This bolsters its reli a bi lity and conse quently, its credi -

bi lity (21 May 2005).

For exam ple, the repor ter writing about Osama Bin Laden should have

stated that the infor ma tion under pin ning the arti cle had been obtai ned

from people who were with Bin Laden on that parti cu lar day and that vari -

ous sour ces had confir med their story. This would have detrac ted from the

style (the repor ter sugge sted that he had been present himself) but it would

have incre a sed the credi bi lity of the item (16 September 2006).

Criticism levelled against Council and courts

In May 2005, Volks krant Maga zine featu red an arti cle on paedop hi les.

Three convic ted paedop hi les explai ned what moti va ted them. A line below

the item stated that ficti ti ous names had been used. One of the feig ned

names turned out to be that of an artist living in that same province and

speci a li sing in pain ting chil dren's portraits. The artist complai ned to the

Press Coun cil, clai ming that the publi ca tion had caused him a great deal of

trou ble. The Coun cil decla red his complaint valid; the paper should have

exer ci sed more care in deter mi ning the risks of using ficti ti ous names by

chec king their occur rence in the real world. Accor ding to the ombuds man,

this would preclude the paper from ever using ficti ti ous names, as there will

102 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

always be some one going by that name in the real world, so that mista ken

iden ti ties can never be ruled out. That is why this verd ict has "far-reaching

consequences for Dutch journalism".

Apart from that, the ombuds man obser ves that the Volks krant's custom

of refer ring to the ficti ti ous ness of names at the end of an arti cle is utterly in

contra ven tion of its own Style Book. This stipu la tes: "If the protec tion of

privacy requi res the use of feig ned names, this should be stated in the arti -

cle, prefe ra bly the first time such a feig ned name crops up. Refe ren cing at

the end in the form of a foot note will in fact put the readers on the wrong

track and detracts from the arti cle's credi bi lity and reli a bi lity". (15 April

2006).

In May 2007, the Press Coun cil issued its Guide li nes. This code of ethics

only gives jour na lists false secu rity, the ombuds man opines. The fact is that

the Coun cil has formu la ted a great deal of gene ral rules, while also indi ca -

ting the excep ti ons to cert ain rules. This is play ing into the hands of male -

vo lent jour na lists. Who deci des when it is alright to devi ate from the rules?

This must be consi de red by the Coun cil in each indi vi dual case. Howe ver, it

only offers false secu rity, as then juris pru dence will be requi red in order to

deter mine whether a parti cu lar course of action falls within the excep tion

provisions or not (12 May 2007).

In some cases, Coun cil verd icts and court rulings differ among them sel -

ves to such an extent that confu sion arises. The ombuds man's columns

provide exam ples in both fields.

Two court rulings invol ving the Volks krant as the defen dant clearly

show that discre pancy in the ombuds man's view. When is a publi ca tion

wrong ful? How far does a jour na list's duty to inves ti gate extend? The

Arnhem court ruled that a jour na list does not need to inves ti gate a matter

to the bone before publis hing. Espe ci ally when public figu res such as poli ti -

ci ans are invol ved, it is suffi cient for the accu sa ti ons to be under pin ned by

the factual mate rial avai la ble at the time of publi ca tion. A newspa per can

also rely on facts repor ted by third parties that have not been investigated by

the paper itself.

In a previ ous case, the Amster dam court ruled quite diffe rently and far

more strictly. It judged that the paper should not have publis hed patients'

nega tive state ments about a physi cian. The paper had indeed asked the

physi cian to comment but accor ding to the judge, not expli citly enough (29

March 2008).

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 103

A simi lar discre pancy can be obser ved in the verd icts of the Press Coun -

cil, accor ding to the ombuds man. He points out a 2003 ruling (RvdJ

2003/38), in which the Coun cil states that the permis sion of inter vie wees is

in part depen dent on the even tual context of a story. A Volks krant repor ter

inten ded to write a posi tive story on breast fee ding, which she had told to

every one contri bu ting to the story. In hind sight, the Volks krant Maga zine

co-ordi na tor deemed her arti cle too one-sided. He wanted to highlight the

draw backs of breast fee ding as well. The publis hed story discus sed both the

advan ta ges and the disad van ta ges but it no longer tallied with the promi ses

made to the inter vie wees. The Coun cil consi de red that care less. A jour na -

list's work, there fore, is not done once the passa ges contai ning the inter vie -

wee's state ments have been submit ted befo re hand. This verd ict possi bly

limits the jour na lis tic lati tude: if the context changes during the course of

the process, interviewees must give their consent once again.

In a later verd ict (Press Coun cil 2007/56) the Coun cil says "it is up to the

jour na list and his editors to deter mine from which point(s) of view a topic

is discus sed and in what context the item is placed".

Position of the ombudsman

The inde pen dence of the ombuds man is a recur rent theme in the columns.

Readers have their doubts: how can anyone be inde pen dent of the paper

that pays his salary? As a matter of fact he is not quite inde pen dent, for he is

also editor of the Aanvul lingen & verbe te ringen [Addi ti ons & Correc ti ons]

section. The editor-in-chief has opted for this construc tion on prag ma tic

grounds because a lot of criti cism regar ding the content of the newspa per

ends up with the ombuds man anyway. He himself deems this "a bit impro -

per": on the one hand he serves as an inde pen dent ombuds man, in part on

the basis of his own statute, on the other he is one of the editors in his capa -

city of admi ni stra tor of the section. This can result in pecu liar situ a ti ons ("a

butcher inspec ting his own meat"), when some one complains to the

ombuds man about the section concer ned but in actual prac tice, this

problem has appa rently never arisen (10 April 2004).

Doesn't the posi tion of ombuds man consti tute "a commu nity-minded

form of window-dres sing"? How seri ous do the editors take his comments?

That criti cism is "hurt ful but justi fied", accor ding to the ombuds man

himself (5 June 2004). He can point out and observe but not impose anyt -

104 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

hing because he is not asso ci a ted with the editors (14 August 2004). Quite

often, howe ver, he writes on 23 Octo ber 2004, "ques ti ons and comments

with a criti cal over tone" can be refu ted by provi ding some explanation.

Anot her not insig ni fi cant ques tion rela tes to the repre sen ta ti ve ness of

the complai ners: are they the tip of the iceberg or are they excep ti ons? What

does the ombuds man actu ally know about the people that come to him

with ques ti ons and criti cisms? (28 May 2005)

Evaluation

If we survey the total harvest of two hundred columns, we first of all notice

that approxi ma tely half (98) of all columns is based on the ombuds man's

own obser va ti ons, either because he was annoyed by arti cles in the paper or

because he was explai ning the edito rial policy or because he deemed that

cert ain events and deve lop ments in media land meri ted a column.

Half of all columns (102) deal with reac ti ons from readers: in some

cases a ques tion but usually criti cism and complaints, for exam ple about

edito rial choi ces.

In half of his columns (105) the ombuds man levels criti cism, at times

quite fier cely, against the editors of the paper or the editor-in- chief in parti -

cu lar. In the other half he puts the editors in the right or explains the edito -

rial policy.

Nearly half of all columns (89) deal with topics rela ting to jour na lis tic

ethics, for exam ple the protec tion of privacy, the use of anony mous sour ces

and about the stand ards obser ved at the paper's website.

He some ti mes uses his column to clarify his own posi tion: how inde -

pen dent is the ombuds man? Is his criti cism heeded or is it more a matter of

window-dres sing?

Anot her remar ka ble fact is that in his columns the ombuds man tends to

empha sise how the editors are uphol ding their own stand ards. Howe ver

radi cal the changes in the media world may be, the decay and the "hyping" if

you will, the Volks krant must keep its back straight and uphold its own

norms. That is what the readers want too. It is for good reason that they

have chosen to take out a subscrip tion to this paper.

In addi tion, espe ci ally the later columns place a remar ka bly great

empha sis on the need for trans pa rency and jour na lis tic accoun ta bi lity:

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 105

explai ning how the editors arri ved at this appro ach and why they made

preci sely these choices.

Two topics crop up most frequently in the ombuds man's columns, topics

that addi ti o nally provoke fierce or even furi ous reac ti ons: the online stand -

ards and the privacy protec tion of suspects and victims. The ombuds man is

noti ce a bly annoyed at the fact that every one can just publish whate ver they

want on the Inter net at the Volks krant blog, but also in reac ti ons to reports

on its news site. There, anony mous accu sa ti ons without giving the person

invol ved an oppor tu nity to voice his side of the story are quite normal, as

are unfoun ded and unsub stan ti a ted alle ga ti ons. The paper should nonet -

he less uphold its own stand ards, both in the prin ted version and on the

website, the ombuds man opines. The crite rion should not be what other

media do but what the Volks krant stand ard is. This applies in parti cu lar to

norms rela ting to privacy protec tion, in the paper and on the site. Suspects

and victims are entit led to protec tion of their perso nal privacy. That norm

is under severe pres sure, espe ci ally at news sites and weblogs. In recent

years, the Volks krant editors have also slac ke ned off in their obser vance of

the privacy norms, the ombuds man obser ves. Yet the paper's own norm

should be the crite rion rather than the fact that the other media keep lowe -

ring their stand ards. The Volks krant is a brand with a repu ta tion and a

respon si bi lity of its own. In a number of columns, the ombuds man expres -

ses that in his opinion the paper's own standards should be preserved.

This makes it all the more pecu liar that he fails to preserve these stand -

ards in other respects, for exam ple with regard to the use of the word

Muslim where the context indi ca tes that in fact the story refers to a terro rist

or extre mist. The ombuds man says that he can appre ci ate the use of the

word Muslim in a head line, consi de ring the limi ted space avai la ble. This on

condi tion, howe ver, that the first sentence of the arti cle points out that the

story concerns terro rists rather than Muslims in gene ral. In this regard, the

ombuds man, howe ver prin ci pled other wise, shows far less principle!

Remar ka ble is the ombuds man's sugge stion to set up a regu lar reply

section, featu red for exam ple once a month, for those who have been inter -

vie wed or portrayed in the paper and subse quently claim that they have

been misre pre sen ted. A reply section may offer a solu tion when a letter to

the editor will not be prin ted and a recti fi ca tion is not consi de red. Equally

remar ka ble is that this option is also kept open for those who have been

106 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

inter vie wed exten si vely only to find that the arti cle contains but two lines of

their story. They feel wronged as well, although the facts tally, for the paper

has not lived up to the expec ta ti ons that have been engen de red. It seems

rather pecu liar to hear the ombuds man argue in favour of a retort in such

cases too, as a retort is more of a correc tion to earlier reports than an oppor -

tu nity to catch up for someone who feels grossly wronged.

The inde pen dence of the ombuds man also invi tes criti cal comments. In

addi tion to being an ombuds man, he is also, on prag ma tic grounds, editor

of the Aanvul lingen & verbe te ringen [Addi ti ons and Correc ti ons] section.

This could give rise to pecu liar situ a ti ons, if some one were to complain to

the ombuds man about the section concer ned: then he would be like the

butcher inspec ting his own meat. Howe ver hypo the ti cal, this still is a pecu -

liar and perhaps even unde si ra ble construc tion. An ombuds man whose

columns indi cate that he sets great store by his utter inde pen dence would

have to take this matter up once more with his editor-in-chief.

In this light it also reflects prag ma tism rather than prin ci ple when the

ombuds man deems a recti fi ca tion unne ces sary once his column has admit -

ted that mista kes have been made and that there fore, the complai ner was

right. In my opinion, it was the Press Coun cil rather than the ombuds man

who was right in obser ving that an inde pen dent ombuds man is not asso ci -

a ted with the edito rial staff and that it is up to the paper itself to rectify its

mistake.

The ombuds man's point of view regar ding the edito rial respon si bi lity for

reac ti ons to the news site and the blogs contra ve nes the Press Coun cil's

point of view. Accor ding to the ombuds man, the editors should not get

carried away by everyt hing that is accep ta ble on the Inter net and unac cep -

ta ble in a prin ted paper. These are two sepa rate enti ties; the editors must

uphold their own stand ards, in the paper and on the website. Whate ver

visi tors do is their busi ness. The Coun cil disag rees: accor ding to this opini -

ons board (Press Coun cil 2007/36), edito rial respon si bi lity also encom pas -

ses reactions from site visitors.

What exactly does the ombuds man assess: the jour na lis tic process and

product or (also) the jour na list's inten ti ons? In his asses sment of the back -

ground arti cle on turmoil within the GroenLinks party ("Karimi used to be

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 107

a member of a terro rist orga ni sa tion in Iran and Duyven dak used to

mentor terro rist groups"), the ombuds man refer red to "an unfor tu nate

course of events", but without "malice aforet hought". In his asses sment of

an inter view on fair trade and the possi bly frau du lent acti vi ties of a Dutch

coffee impor ter, the ombuds man commen ted that undoub tedly the jour -

na list did not mean to put other coffee impor ters in a bad light, but the fact

is that such a side remark does more damage than neces sary; there fore, she

failed in her duty to check the allegations.

If the use of ficti ti ous names would require the paper to first check whether

such names are used in the real world, as the Coun cil states, writing these

types of stories would be well-nigh impos si ble, the ombuds man opines.

And for that reason, using first names or initi als only rather than ficti ti ous

names in privacy-sensi tive arti cles would not bolster their reada bi lity and

credi bi lity, he comments. Why would a story's credi bi lity be served by the

state ment that the names are ficti ti ous and not by a state ment that only first

names are used in order to safe gu ard the subjects' privacy?

What the ombuds man refers to as provi ding false secu rity, in his column

on the Guide li nes of the Press Coun cil, is in fact testing each indi vi dual case

against the excep tion provi si ons. As juris pru dence incre a ses, it will become

easier to ascert ain whether somet hing falls within the scope or not. That is

quite a diffe rent matter alto ge ther than offe ring false security.

Does the work of an ombuds man produce a decline in the number of

complaints submit ted to the courts or the Press Coun cil? Can we say that

the ombuds man is taking the chill out of the air? The answer to that ques -

tion will not be found in this analy sis. Over the period from 2004 to 2008,

the Press Coun cil has ruled on eighteen complaints lodged against the

Volks krant. In only five cases was the complaint deemed wholly or parti ally

valid.

As a matter of fact, the reverse can also be the case: when the ombuds -

man expo ses a lack of care on the part of his own paper, publis hing the same

in his column, the inju red party may actu ally be indu ced to go to the Coun -

cil or to court. Quite anot her matter is the ques tion of what addi ti o nal satis -

fac tion the complai ner would obtain from invol ving the Press Council.

108 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

Van Dalen and Deuze (2005 and 2006) conduc ted a study into the ombud -

smen and readers' editors at Dutch daily newspa pers. They iden ti fied two

types of ombuds man: the "readers' advo cate" and the "newspa per ambas sa -

dor". The ombud smen and the readers' editor assu ming the role of reader's

advo cate are stic klers for their inde pen dent posi tion with regard to the

editors. They are the inter nal critics who, on behalf of the readers, call the

editors to account to those same readers about asses sments and choi ces

made. The ambas sa dor, on the other hand, is more of a PR offi cial who

attempts to rein force the ties between the readers and the paper, in close

colla bo ra tion with the paper's marke ting depart ment.

In their study, the authors conclu ded that as a group, the Dutch ombud -

smen assume both a PR role and an inter nal critic's role. They refer to a

sliding scale on which each ombuds man or readers' editor takes up an indi -

vi dual posi tion. The study has made one thing clear: the Volks krant

ombuds man is the fly in the oint ment of the editors, guided by his convic -

tion that the editeditors of a quality paper should set and observe high stand -

ards in their every day work. In spite of the criti cal comments above, we can

frankly say that the Volks krant has an ombuds man in the tradi tion of the

readers' advo ca tes. Quali fi ca ti ons such as "watchdog" and "quality control -

ler" would, there fore, be more appropri ate than "decoy" and "moral

censor".

Watchdog, decoy or moral censor? 109

110 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

Transparency, criticism and accountability?

A close look at the columns of the NOS ombudsman

(2007-2008)

Harmen Groenhart

In Septem ber 2007, Ton van Brus sel commen ced his duties as the first

ombuds man of the NOS [Nether lands Broad cas ting Autho rity]. By

appoin ting an ombuds man, the NOS aimed to achieve a multi fa ce ted goal.

The ombuds man, accor ding to the statute, is to promote trans pa rency and

accoun ta bi lity within the NOS, as well as improve the quality of the news

cove rage, improve its acces si bi lity to the public and raise aware ness of

public inte rest among the programme makers (the code has been inclu ded

at the end of this chap ter, the statute at the back of this book).

The duties of the ombuds man boil down to dealing with complaints

and writing columns of a "commen ting nature" about the acti vi ties of the

NOS.1 He tests the acti ons taken by the NOS against the jour na lis tic house

code, based on complaints recei ved from viewers and liste ners, his own

views, discus si ons in the profes si o nal group or sugge sti ons from within the

orga ni sa tion. In addi tion to analy sing actual NOS produc ti ons, the

ombuds man also discus ses gene ral issues in the field of jour na lism.

The ombuds man is formally inde pen dent. Accor ding to his statute, he is

"auto no mous" and cannot be given orders. He reports to the Gene ral Direc -

tor. By his own account, he does not encoun ter any substan tive guid ance

from the Gene ral Direc tor or the edito rial offi ces he writes about.2 He does

receive substan tive feed back from an inde pen dent "Ombuds man Commit -

tee".3 Accor ding to Van Brus sel, this commit tee acts as a soun ding board

only; in actual prac tice, there may be diffe ren ces of opinion between the

ombuds man and the commit tee.

Van Brus sel's findings are submit ted to the edito rial offi ces. On Friday

morning his columns are sent to all the edito rial offi ces as a newslet ter; they

are discus sed in the Monday morning evalu a tion meetings. In addi tion, he

Transparency, criticism and accountability? 111

some ti mes discus ses his findings directly with the edito rial offices.

His columns are publis hed every week on the www.nos.nl web site and

on tele text. The ombuds man has his own web page, featu ring an archive of

all his columns up to now as well as docu ments like a statute, the NOS jour -

na lis tic code, the complaints proce dure and the (semi) annual report. The

NOS home page provi des a link to the ombuds man's site, as do the NOS

news page and the Studio Sport page.

As commen ting columns may contri bute to the trans pa rency and accoun -

ta bi lity of the NOS, the columns, in the light of this study, offer good points

of depar ture for a descrip tive analy sis of the ombuds man pheno me non. In

line with the prece ding chap ters, we are concen tra ting here on the ombuds -

man's perfor mance on the basis of what his columns disclose about the

NOS. This descrip tive study encom pas ses all 57 columns of the ombuds -

man, publis hed between 13 Septem ber 2007 and 31 October 2008.

This chap ter focu ses on two ques ti ons: 1) What jour na lis tic themes does

the NOS ombuds man address? 2) How "criti cal" is the ombuds man with

regard to the NOS? The first ques tion, tied in to the notion of trans pa rency,

yields an over view of the jour na lis tic themes that crop up in the ombuds -

man's columns. Subse quently, we illu strate the leading topics in detail by

means of speci fic cases. The second ques tion, tied to the notion of accoun -

ta bi lity, pertains to the nature of the columns and the manner in which the

ombuds man forms his opinion. Our findings are based on the

ombudsman's columns.

1. What journalistic themes does the ombudsman address?

w Considerations in categorising journalistic themes

The majo rity of columns can easily be redu ced to a central jour na lis tic

theme. This is prima rily due to the column's recog ni sa ble format; most

columns are set up accor ding to the follo wing struc ture: complaint -

response from the editors - comments - asses sment. The title of a column

usually refers to a parti cu lar key topic, such as Krakers hebben recht op

weder hoor [Squat ters entit led to be heard] (9 Novem ber 2007) or Jour naal

leert niet van taal fou ten (4 Janu ary 2008) [TV news not lear ning from lang -

u age errors]. Howe ver, the topics are not always univo cal. Some columns

deal with two themes, such as Zeden de lin quen ten en korte berich ten [Sex

112 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

offen ders and short reports] (19 Septem ber 2008). This column compri ses

two small columns on vari ous topics. Other columns seem univo cal but

never the less exhi bit a substan tive caesura, such as Nekschot, de vlag en de

lading [Nekschot, sailing and false colours] (23 May 2008). This column

starts off with a brief descrip tion of an over-simpli fied heading to a tele text

item, after which Van Brus sel expands on the pheno me non of free dom of

speech. Columns addres sing a number of sub-topics are grou ped with

more than one jour na lis tic theme cate gory. Conse quently, the total

category incidence exceeds the number of columns.4)

In addi tion to substan tive caesu ras, it is also concepts that are open to

several inter pre ta ti ons that preclude cate go ries from presen ting them sel ves

as a matter of course. For exam ple, the ombuds man regu larly recei ves lang -

u age-rela ted complaints. It is temp ting to range such columns under Ling -

uis tic usage, but that would obli te rate a major part of their signi fi cance.

Like the ombuds man himself says: some complaints about ling uis tic usage

pertain to ling uis tics, others to style or biased words. Thus, such columns

also deal with mutu ally diver gent stand ards. Ling uis tic correct ness, for

exam ple, can be asso ci a ted with care and caution, style with reflec ting (the

lang u age of) society and coloured words with neutrality.

The "jour na lis tic theme" is not always expli citly commu ni ca ted. In such

cases, we consi de red the complaints addres sed by the column. For exam ple,

in De NOS, de Spelen en het geheim (?) [The NOS, the Olym pics and the

secret (?)] (22 August 2008), atten tion is focu sed on the ombuds man's

account. He explains that reruns of Olym pics broad casts are not avai la ble

on the Inter net because the NOS has limi ted rights to air cove rage of the

Olym pics abroad. The column, howe ver, is clas si fied under "acces si bi lity"

because it is the viewer's complaint (alle ged withhol ding of infor ma tion)

that deter mi nes the perspective of the column.

The nature of jour na lis tic norms is condu cive to mutual conflicts. That

is why multiple jour na lis tic stand ards or norms may be cove red in a

column by the ombuds man. The point of depar ture of this content analy sis,

howe ver, is that each column has a focus on a parti cu lar norm or can at least

be redu ced to a key norm. When deter mi ning the topics (inso far as they are

not imme di a tely evident), we have searched the text for refe ren ces made to

norms or prac ti ces, both expli citly in the ombuds man's line of reaso ning

and impli citly in the complaints submitted by the public.

The jour na lis tic themes can be cate go ri sed as follows:

Transparency, criticism and accountability? 113

Themes in ombudsman columns September 2007 - October 2008, ranked by

Free gathering of news frequency

11 Neutrality vs. value judgements

10 Newsworthiness

6 Privacy

5 Exhaustiveness and hearing both sides

4 Accountability

3 Negativity

3 Balanced reporting

2 Design and format

2 Programming

2 Shocking images

2 Accessibility of information

2 Acknowledgement of sources

1 Funding of the NOS

1 Horseplay

1 Language errors

1 Sensationalism

1 Web logs

1 Weather

1 Subtitling

1 Giving away sports scores

1 Independence

1 Freedom of speech

1 Degree of difficulty

At first sight, the over view reve als that cert ain themes recur quite regu larly

in the columns of the NOS ombuds man; besi des these, atten tion is rather

diverse. Themes that are frequently discus sed include neutra lity, news wor -

thi ness, privacy, exhaus ti ve ness and accoun ta bi lity. Thus, the empha sis is

on themes directly rela ted to the task set for the NOS: infor ming a wide

audience.

In addi tion to the recur rent themes, the ombuds man appa rently divi des

his atten tion over vari ous topics in his columns: on the one hand, speci fic

cases provo king few complaints (subtit les), on the other highly gene ral

issues drawing a flood of complaints (lang u age errors). This means that the

114 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

number of complaints is not neces sa rily an indi ca tor of the amount of

atten tion the ombuds man is prepa red to devote to a jour na lis tic theme. The

selec tion of topics for the columns in ques tion is also nouris hed by current

affairs, rele vance, rela tion to the NOS task, corres pon dence to prece ding

columns and the ombudsman's personal views.

Somet hing that should be noted is that some cate go ries in the survey are

more closely rela ted than others. For exam ple, in terms of content there is

common ground between the cate go ries of "neutra lity" and "balan ced

repor ting", while "balan ced repor ting" has points in common with "hearing

both sides". Never the less, the substan tive diffe ren ces between the cate go -

ries are suffi cient to warrant discus sion as sepa rate themes. The follo wing

para graphs will enter at length into the content of the themes.

w Neutrality: how neutral is the attention paid by the NOS?

One of the two themes most frequently discus sed in the columns of the

NOS ombuds man is the neutra lity of the NOS. Across the board, the

subject is complaints submit ted by viewers clai ming that the NOS is not

neutral at all. It is hardly surpri sing that this theme crops up regu larly

because it ties in directly with the NOS objec tive: being a primary source of

infor ma tion for the Dutch popu la tion. In this regard, the scope of the

target group is as wide as can be in a coun try: all Dutch citi zens. The NOS is

thus commit ted to value-free and neutral cove rage, which is frequently

reite ra ted in the jour na lis tic code. Among other things, this code states that

the NOS is balan ced, unat tached, pluri form, unbi a sed, unpre ju di ced and

truthful. The NOS does not discri mi nate, is free and sepa ra tes facts from

opini ons. Preci sely because this should consti tute the rati o nale for the news

orga ni sa tion, it can be expec ted to give rise to heated discussions.

In the ombuds man's columns, three sub-groups can be disting uis hed in

rela tion to neutra lity: the alle ged leftism of the NOS, its pro-Israeli leanings

and other, less syste ma tic posi ti ons adop ted by the NOS.

w The leftist movement

The NOS is not unique in evoking a feeling that it is not neutral but leans to

the left in terms of ideo logy. "A leftist bias", the ombuds man writes (23

Octo ber 2007) "is a repro ach that (…) affects jour na lism over all. Jour na -

lists are distrust ful, criti cal and indif fe rent to autho ri ties. Those quali ties

tend to be asso ci a ted with the Left rather than the Right". Although the

Transparency, criticism and accountability? 115

ombuds man states that he is not swam ped with complaints about alle ged

leftism, this repro ach is long-esta blis hed and persis tent. To this Van Brus -

sel adds euphe mis ti cally that the "conver sa ti o nal tone in the public debate,

when it is a matter of left or right, lost its subdu ed ness a while ago" (23

October 2008).

The leftist move ment repro ach beco mes visi ble in the complaints on the

cove rage of a demon stra tion by the Nati o na list People's Move ment (NVB)

(28 Septem ber 2007). The report refers to "right-wing extre mist marchers"

and "left-wing acti vists". One of the complai ners writes: "The ultra-right

marchers were depic ted as the bad guys, while they were entit led to demon -

strate and had obtai ned permis sion for their demon stra tion. Yet the news

portrayed the ultra-rights as 'wrong' and 'vil lains', making out the

ultra-leftists as the 'heroes' (…)". The NOS editors cannot iden tify with this

complaint because the "ultra-right" label does not equal "bad guys". Accor -

ding to the editors, the label is in fact value-free and points to the NVB

views. Refer ring to the NVB web site, the ombuds man states that this label

should be accep ta ble to the NVB. The proble ma tic aspect of the cove rage, in

the opinion of the ombuds man, rather lies in the inter pre ta tion by those

oppo sing ultra-right. The report speaks of "leftist demon stra tors" and the

complai ner speaks of "ultra-leftists" but accor ding to the expert Van

Donse laar, "the media is rather quick in assu ming that those distur bing an

ultra-right demon stra tion will be either leftists or ultra-leftists". Although

leftists were proba bly present, the expert states that oppo nents come from

the foot ball hool igan and apoli ti cal quar ters as well. In conclu ding the

column, the ombuds man states that the cove rage "nouris hed the idea" of

the NOS being leftist. The report concer ned was taking turns on two wheels

in assu ming the demon stra tors were "leftist". The editors should indeed

have opted for a more neutral term but accor ding to the ombuds man, this

mistake does not mean that the NOS is a leftist organisation.

The "leftist move ment" also returns in the column entit led Waarom

werd Geert Wilders onder bro ken? [Why was Geert Wilders inter rup ted?] (4

April 2008), about the live broad cast of the parli a men tary debate on the

Fitna movie by right wing MP Geert Wilders. The debate was broad cast

from four o'clock and when Geert Wilders, of all people, had the floor the

programme was inter rup ted for the "sche du led program ming". The gene ral

editors state that the debate went on longer than expec ted and that "NOS

News does not have its own broad cas ting time. (…) We indi ca ted in

116 THE NEWS OMBUDSMAN

advance that we could only broad cast until ten to six. We would have inter -

rup ted anyone, (…) but it bothe red us too that it had to happen preci sely

during Wilders' contri bu tion (…)". Accor ding to the column, unfor tu nate

circum stan ces led to Wilders being inter rup ted, but the complai ner did not

agree: "See, here we have the NOS, the leftist move ment again, brea king off

the Wilders' debate while Wilders himself of all people is spea king". The

ombuds man coun ters this alle ga tion, although he acknow led ges that it was

annoying to the viewers.

On the one hand, the defence consists in rende ring the gene ral editors'

prag ma tic expla na tion, on the other in poin ting out that in fact the viewers

had not been denied access to the infor ma tion. After all, the full live report

could be follo wed on the digi tal chan nel and on the Inter net, while it was

cove red by the NOVA/ Den Haag Vandaag current affairs program mes in

the evening. His conclu sion said a lot: "There is a remedy for everyt hing but

conspi racy theo ries clai ming that the NOS deli be ra tely ceased its broad cast

when Geert Wilders started his plea".

The Wilders cove rage, accor ding to Van Brus sel, in fact consti tu tes

reason to assert exactly the oppo site of the leftist move ment repro ach. The

ombuds man regu larly recei ves letters from complai ners clai ming that the

NOS is actu ally offe ring Wilders a "refuge". "You know that what he propo -

ses is sense less. Why all that atten tion? You are just giving this man and his

party more power", Het nieuws van Wilders [Wilders' news] reads (18

Janu ary 2008). In response to such complaints, the ombuds man refers to

the code, stating that the NOS's opinion of Wilders is irre le vant in its cove -

rage. The NOS, accor ding to the ombuds man, should judge his message on

its news value only. The theme of news value is discus sed in the next

paragraph.

The "gene ral feeling" that the NOS is elitist and leftist remains no more

than a feeling, accor ding to the ombuds man. He states that such repro aches

lack a factual under pin ning. Even if the NOS were leftist, it would be diffi -

cult to prove, "preci sely because 'per cep ti on' and 'jus ti fy ing oneself ' play

such a key role". All the same, taking the edge off the repro ach is diffi cult.

Van Brus sel refers to the appre ci a tion for the NOS Jour naal newscast

among the viewers. Without naming a concrete source, he states that 68 per

cent of Dutch tele vi sion viewers deem the NOS Jour naal the most objec tive

news programme, follo wed by RTL news at 22 per cent. The ombuds man

claims that these figu res would have been diffe rent "if the NOS Jour naal

Transparency, criticism and accountability? 117

acted as the mouthpiece for either Left or Right". Although in theory such

ratings do not preclude that the NOS is subjec tive after all (yet in the eyes of

the viewers less subjec tive than RTL), his argu ment is not implau si ble. It

adds to the ombuds man's credit that he is look ing forward to the NPO

[Nether lands Public Broad cas ting] study into the pluri for mity of its

program mes: "(…) it is a gods end that this study will be conduc ted, hope -

fully by a body that is as independent as possible" (23 October 2008).