I’m the editor of the Pikes Peak Bulletin. A reader sent me an email because he was disappointed in an article I wrote recently, “Students offered counseling after agents in tactical gear detain person outside high school.”
I decided to share his email and my response to it because I think he asks a fair question, and I’m happy for an opportunity to answer it for him plus any readers who may have the same question. Here is the text of his email:
Why is the story of ICE at Palmer High even a[n article]? It didn’t happen on school grounds. There was no altercation. If any children saw it and were traumatized, they need to grow up. Everyone has witnessed an arrest. It is sad that this is the best the PPB, that I have subscribed to for decades, can come up with.
And here is my response:
Hello,
Thank you for reaching out with your concern. Much respect for that. I appreciate you giving me a chance to tell you why the story of an ICE arrest outside Palmer High is a story I chose to write and the Bulletin chose to publish.
There are a few questions I ask when deciding whether or not to write, or assign, a story on a given topic.
The first and most important consideration: Is there a public interest?
In this case, the answer was clearly “yes.” You and I have a right to know what is being done with our tax dollars, on our streets, in our name – in front of a public school, no less.
As noted in the article, unlike with local law enforcement, there is very little transparency with federal immigration enforcement. They don’t put out a blotter, they often wear masks, they don’t always show badges and they don’t regularly use body cams. And, there are real questions around civil rights and due process in how federal immigration enforcement is being conducted right now, including from the ACLU and the Cato Institute.
Typically, a story is at its core about “who, what, when, where, why.” But in covering present-day federal immigration enforcement, the story is often as much about what we don’t know as it is facts that are known. Emails to ICE for comment go unanswered, requests under the Freedom of Information Act linger in the “received” status.
It’s not just small outlets like the Bulletin, either. Large national outlets have the same issue. Even GOP and Democratic lawmakers with oversight of the Department of Homeland Security report they are being stonewalled.
Acting as a public watchdog is arguably journalisms highest calling. Reporting on an opaque and extremely powerful government agency – acting in front of local young people in their place of learning – entirely fits that mission.
Other questions I ask to determine whether something is storyworthy include, “Is there a local angle?” and “Will another outlet do essentially the same story?”
In this case, there was a local angle (it happened here) and no other outlet picked it up. I’m not sure any other reporters even knew it happened. I only knew because of a source. And, as mentioned, ICE does not in general tell anyone what it does.
Thank you for reading and writing in. I hope you’ll read for decades more.
Heila Ershadi
Editor of the Pikes Peak Bulletin
