Unilluminated: Gleick canned by San Francisco Chronicle

The Chronicle no longer considers Peter Gleick to be a local “luminary.”

Reuters reports:

… It also raised ethical questions for journalists. Alana Nguyen, executive producer of the San Francisco Chronicle’s website, said the newspaper had discontinued Gleick’s unpaid blog because it was part of a feature reserved for local “luminaries.”

“We decide who is a luminary,” she said. “That kind of admission is something that affects your reputation in the community, and we strive to have people with a good reputation in the community.”

Any journalist who obtained information in the way Gleick did would be fired from a traditional newsroom, said Kelly McBride, senior faculty at the Poynter Institute journalism school. She said reporters should not use information from the memos that Gleick obtained without taking pains to verify it. [Emphasis added]

Read the entire report.

2 thoughts on “Unilluminated: Gleick canned by San Francisco Chronicle”

  1. Yet they did not call his actions criminal, which they clearly were. MSM integrity casts a very dim light. They need to try harder.

  2. Wood, they are used to being neutral on issues where they can be sued. You can rob a bank in broad daylight and be carried off by the cops live on the news with the gun still in your hands and you will still be an “alleged” bank robber until conviction.

    If a journalist had obtained these documents via deception and illegal means, they would be fired.
    If an attorney had submitted the strategy document as evidence, they would be under investigation by the bar.

    I will accept that the Chronicle and the Tribune, despite obviously being in strong support of the AGW movement, condemned this as going too far. It’s a step. A small step, but if we can get them to agree with us on small things then maybe it will open their minds to more important issues.

Comments are closed.