Author: Kevin McGrath
Published: March 01, 2000
Last Updated: April 06, 2000
Printer-friendly version

Good Writing

Public access projects make great exercises

These endeavors force writers and editors to put readers’ needs first

By Kevin McGrath

Newspapers that contemplate tests of public access laws tend to think in terms of changing public policy or reforming weak state laws.

But after taking part in two such projects in three years, I can recommend them for another reason: They force writers and editors to think, report and write at the readers’ level.

Granted, any good story accomplishes that goal. But public access projects, properly done, are unique in forcing newspapers to put readers’ needs first. So much the better for readers and journalists alike.

Even the reporting forces us to change perspective. Journalists who take part in public access projects aren’t really being journalists — with their brash self-confidence, deep knowledge of civil procedures and often guaranteed access to information — when they show up at the county sheriff’s office or city hall. They’re being citizens. They carry no clout other than the state law that allows everyone to see public records.

That can be downright scary, especially when the sheriff starts demanding to know who you are and why you want to see a crime report or jail roster. So the experience builds that most valuable of commodities: empathy for the readers.

A journey for readers

These projects also take readers onto largely unfamiliar ground. People tend to have little day-to-day interest in public records until, for example, they’re in a car crash, suffer a burglary or want to challenge an annexation or a zoning change. So they need to be told why they have a stake in the story.

Here’s how Wichita Eagle writer Hurst Laviana handled that challenge in the overview for Kansas‚ project, “Public records, private rules:”

Ask for a public record in Kansas, and you’ll probably get what you want.

But don’t be surprised if your request generates blank stares, suspicious looks and a demand to provide a lot more information about yourself than the law requires.

If you want to know what your schools spend on salaries, expect to be asked why, and who you work for.

If you want to check on a local crime, you may be questioned by police and you may have to submit to a criminal background check. In Harper County, you may even be detained if you don’t explain who you are and why you want to see the crime reports. In several counties, copies will cost $5 a page.

Readers also need to be shown that the story isn’t about journalists, their self-interest or their opinions about how well public access laws work. It’s about whether public officials allow citizens to exercise oversight of their actions. That forces the reporting and writing away from personal experience and sources within journalism and toward sources that can explain the role of public records in a free society.

Here’s how the Kansas overview presented the concept:

Many agencies defended their reluctance to disclose information that Kansas law says is open to every one. Some officials said they withheld records out of concern for the privacy or safety of those named in the documents.

Those concerns, while well-intentioned, are rarely warranted and ultimately threaten the American way of life, say advocates of open government. The danger, they say, is that citizens will be shut out of the democratic process.

The Kansas Open Records Act is intended to make sure voters can monitor elected officials and see how their tax dollars are spent, said Topeka attorney Brad Smoot, who was in the Kansas attorney general’s office when the law was enacted.

“It’s an element of democracy, and therefore it’s something that everyone ought to be interested in,” Smoot said. “You can’t know what your government is doing unless you have access to that information.”

Some tips on access projects

If you’re willing to put your reporting and writing to such tests and try an access project, here are a few tips to keep in mind:

• Remember, you’re not the story. Sure, you have to do the hard work and write about it, but don’t be lured into thinking your readers care what happened to a bunch of journalists. They care about themselves and their interests.
• For that reason, show readers their stake in what you’ve learned. Are they endangered without knowing it because they can’t monitor their government’s actions? How and why? Who can speak to why that’s important to ordinary folks? Can they or can’t they track how their taxes are being spent? Do documents show decisions being made in secret?
• Because you’re not the story, eschew sources within journalism. Especially, don’t have reporters opine on their experience seeking records. But do show what citizens could go through if they tried it. In the above example, you can bet Brad Smoot carries a lot more weight with readers than a J-school prof who can only lament how the public and press are being shortchanged. That’s why we interviewed him.
• Translate your terms, and simplify your language. Many readers won’t know what you mean by “sunshine laws,” “access,” “binding legal opinions” or even “public record.” Cast the ideas in their terms, not yours.
• Equip your readers. Show them how they can do what you’ve done. Show them ordinary folks who have tried. And tell them how they can prod their legislators if they want to act.
• At every step, ask two vital questions: What’s at stake? Why should readers care? Answer them, and you’ve met the readers’ needs.