Canned Heat: What did I learn from our coverage of a co-worker?

• Report the facts. Basic, right? But we had a lot of people, all over the company, giving their two cents about the event, and it's easy to let an assumption or two slip in. The day after the game, Internet sleuths were carefully studying video and photos from the game, and some of them believed a woman might have thrown the can. Don't take pronouns for granted. Just because police are looking for someone who is a man, and just because you're talking about beer and baseball, doesn't mean a woman couldn't have done it. Stick to what you can prove.


• Be fair. Think of the last time you read, wrote or edited a crime story. How would you feel if you were the accused at the centre of the story? Or how would you feel if it was a friend or relative? Everyone is someone's family, someone's friend. And we're all innocent until proven guilty. Ken wasn't always afforded the benefit of the doubt or common courtesy that we extend even to people accused of heinous crimes. It's easy to see that when you know the person at the centre of a story, but we should exercise that sort of judgment when we report on strangers too.


• Maintain perspective. No one was more livid than I was when a Blue Jays playoff game was interrupted because of fan behaviour, but that's what this was: fan behaviour. This was an important game, it was the latest in a string of beer-throwing incidents at Blue Jays games and Kim's teammate Adam Jones said they were also subjected to racial slurs. But fans have interfered with games before and will continue to do so, and while Kim quite possibly could have been hurt if hit by a beer can, this wasn't life-or-death. By no means am I saying we at Postmedia or in the industry at large shouldn't have reported on this - there was significant interest Canada-wide in the story, it was a high-profile situation and I think it's fair to hold it up as an example of broader issues or patterns across society. It should have run prominently in every paper in the country, and I'm sure it did. But multiple takes on the same day might not have been warranted. We all have an opinion, but newspapers already miss so many stories. On a related note...


• Maintain integrity. One big reason newspapers needed to report on this story was that the Internet was jumping to conclusions on its own, and I think we'd all prefer thoughtful reporting to the actions of an angry mob. But in an attempt to get out in front of this story, the Toronto Sun wound up in the unfortunate position of offering the public Postmedia money to identify someone on the company payroll. Oops. I'm not saying papers like the Sun shouldn't think outside the box to break stories and draw in readers, but when we try to push the envelope, we should question our own motives. Are we looking to lead the way on reporting, or capitalize on raw emotion? If one the guys behind the Sun idea happened to walk into an elevator with Ken Pagan, could they justify their decision? Never forget, it's the public's interest that gives us our licence to do what we do.