911 audio of Waseca case

[Free Press Editor Joe Spear]

A few readers called in to say it was tasteless of the newspaper to put the 911 audio recording of Alec Kruger tell officers his parents were shot. It was played in court for the jury. I'd like to here thoughts on the ethics of this and the public's right to know issues. Frankly, I'm always a little squeamish when we do this.

[Bob Jentges]

A few readers called in to say it was tasteless of the newspaper to put the 911 audio recording of Alec Kruger tell officers his parents were shot. It was played in court for the jury. I'd like to here thoughts on the ethics of this and the public's right to know issues. Frankly, I'm always a little sqeamish when we do this.

In this particular case if the audio was played to the jury in open court I expect spectators heard it. Under those circumstances I see absolutly nothing wrong with the newspaper publishing it. (I consider this different than the kind of sensationalism I referred to previously in a different thread) In the instant case (example) it was already public information. With all the local interest why should just the spectators present in the court room at the time have access. Furthermore, I think it might be better if the actual audio or transcript of same is available to the public than for them to hear it second hand, third hand, etc., and hearing it wrong!

[Dan Conner]

A few readers called in to say it was tasteless of the newspaper to put the 911 audio recording of Alec Kruger tell officers his parents were shot. It was played in court for the jury. I'd like to here thoughts on the ethics of this and the public's right to know issues. Frankly, I'm always a little squeamish when we do this.

A little of this was covered in another thread, about the rights of the press in police reports. It was asserted then that it was the right of the press. However, I do think there is a thin line between voyeurism and freedom of the press. I didn't hear the tape, but if it enhanced the knowledge of the public and served a useful purpose, other than a morbid voyeurism, then it should be OK. If not, then I would ask why?

[Amanda Dyslin]

For some reason, the lack of gunshot sounds in the audio made it more OK to me. I'm not sure how that's relavent, but to me, it helped lessen the sensationalism of it. Do I think posting the audio enhanced public knowledge? No. Do I think we posted it because it was available and the public is devouring every detail of this case? Yes. Does that mean I think we were wrong to post it? I don't know. There is a lot of information out there that is public that we shouldn't publish for various ethical reasons. This may have been one of those cases. But, like I said, I keep going back to the fact that the gunshot sounds were not audible, which took away some of that voyeuristic quality for me. Also, the boy's tone was calm, because it was clear he was confused as to the severity of the situation or even what was going on at all. ...So, I don't know. This was one of those difficult to call situations.

[Dan Conner]

For some reason, the lack of gunshot sounds in the audio made it more OK to me. I'm not sure how that's relavent, but to me, it helped lessen the sensationalism of it. Do I think posting the audio enhanced public knowledge? No. Do I think we posted it because it was available and the public is devouring every detail of this case? Yes. Does that mean I think we were wrong to post it? I don't know. There is a lot of information out there that is public that we shouldn't publish for various ethical reasons. This may have been one of those cases. But, like I said, I keep going back to the fact that the gunshot sounds were not audible, which took away some of that voyeuristic quality for me. Also, the boy's tone was calm, because it was clear he was confused as to the severity of the situation or even what was going on at all. ...So, I don't know. This was one of those difficult to call situations.

Then, I think it was fine. I didn't listen to the tape, but I'm glad The Free Press used discretion to exclude the purely sensational parts of it. There are already many strong feelings about the case.

[Ben Willaert]

In cases like this one that are such big water cooler topics, I think it is important to get the right information out. Gossip can distort what really happened; for the newspaper to go as in-depth as possible, can dispel the rumors and misinformation. Extra care needs to be taken by the reporters though, to ensure accuracy and little speculation or jumping to conclusions in their reporting. Presenting the information straight from the source (911 call) does this.

The girl hit and killed on Third Ave was reported to have a lot more to do with alcohol then it really did. A little more restraint was needed instead of running with the police comment that alcohol had not been ruled out early on.