Herald’s Hospital Election Story Flawed, Press Assn. Review Finds

COURT HOUSE — The Cape May County Herald’s Feb. 3 story about Cape Regional Medical Center’s Medical Staff’s election, with remarks by a cardiologist who lost the vice president’s race, was reviewed by a retired executive editor of the Hunterdon Democrat newspaper for fairness and accuracy after the medical center’s officials complained.
“The medical center’s complaint is a fair one,” wrote Jay Langley, retired executive editor of Hunterdon Democrat.
This newspaper initiated review after Cape Regional Medical Center officials objected to the tenor of the page one story. The Herald sought a peer review by the New Jersey Press Association.
The review was done by Langley on Feb. 24.
“A good local newspaper’s most important job is to be seen as honest, accurate, thorough, tough when it must be, but FAIR about all things. It must conduct itself so that people will WANT to deal with it, will WANT to believe in it and will WANT to appear in it,” he wrote.
“So even if this article were completely accurate, thorough and well-crafted, which it is not, this newspaper has a problem,” he continued.
“Journalists are used to thinking along the lines of the legal aphorism: ‘Truth is a defense.’ But in this context, the bald truth is not a defense.
“The bald truth that a disgruntled doctor made some off-the-cuff accusations to a reporter does not have equal journalistic footing with a trusted local institution’s considered policies, and that institution’s many years of service to the community.
“Truth is usually nuanced. In this case, the reporter and the newspaper did not recognize that fact, and that is the gist of the medical center’s complaint. In the rush to get the story, write it and print it, too many nuances were ignored,” Langley wrote.
Remarks reported by Cardiologist Dr. Suketu Nanavati, who lost the election, “as it was done here was gratuitous; doing it without getting a responsible comment from the institution was so thoughtless as to be provocative,” Langley wrote.
Langley wrote that the complaint was a “fair one…It would hold no water in a court of law, but we’re not talking about a court of law. We’re talking about the court of public opinion. We’re talking about how these parties, the medical center’s staff and management, and the newspaper’s staff and management, will view one another, and deal with one another, next week and next month and next year.”
To avoid future situations similar to that, Langley advised that two separate stories be written. The first should report only the outcome of the election “and give the glad, bland comments of the winners and the administration.”
Such an article, he noted, “would not be the proper place to insert unanswered criticisms and snide innuendo by disgruntled Dr. Nanavati.” It could have simply ended with Nanavati’s quote, “I may have lost but democracy won.”
If his comments were deemed newsworthy, after consultation with editors, a second story could present Nanavati’s differing opinions that were “properly researched and properly balanced.”
“It could have been couched as a tutorial for the public on how the hospital is managed and governed,” Langley wrote.
Langley urged that the medical center and newspaper communicate even more in the future.
“Despite the reticence and hurt feelings of the moment, the best answer is not to write less about the medical center, but to write more, albeit with more care. It is time to increase the dialogue between the parties. Both sides must work hard now to keep the lines of communication open and to rebuild trust,” he continued.
“The aim here is not ‘payback.’ Nobody should expect, or offer, a ‘puff’’ piece to appease the medical center. The aim is to educate the public. Both parties can share that job,” he wrote.
“This will really go against conventional thinking. This would be an excellent time for the medical center to increase its advertising in the Herald. The rationale for this is that the medical center really needs to get its story out to the public by every means available, including both news AND educational advertising,” Langley wrote.
The Herald regrets publication of the Feb. 3 story, and will work diligently to ensure all future stories are fair and balanced.