A story in Investor’s Business Daily on Tuesday wonders if the reporters covering computer company Hewlett-Packard have lost their objectivity in covering the company in the wake of revelations that H-P obtained phone records of reporters and thought about spying on some of them.
Christine Tatum, assistant business editor of the Denver Post and president of the Society of Professional Journalists, wonders in the story whether the journalists can maintain their objectivity.
Ken Spencer Brown wrote, “Tatum says she doubts she could remain objective in such circumstances. But some publications might not want to remove an experienced reporter with the ability — proven dramatically in this case — to dig up information.
“‘As an editor, I would have to have a hard conversation with the reporter,’ she said.
“The relationship between reporters and companies they cover is inevitably an uneasy one. But HP’s actions, a first for a company its size, tread new ground.
“‘It’s clear that HP has some fences to mend with the affected journalists, and it may be a while before they regain the trust of the media in general,’ said Jamie Diaferia, partner at Infinite Public Relations.”
Read more here. I like the story because it’s the first that has answered a looming question — of the reporters targeted by Hewlett-Packard, which ones have written about the company since they were notified they had been targeted? Many of them have let colleagues in their newsrooms take over coverage, or simply haven’t written anything about H-P.
