Southwest issues follow-up statement on Leisha Hailey incident

The Internet is out at the house (screw you, AT&T), so I’m attempting to post this from my phone (wish me luck). Below is a follow-up statement from Southwest Airlines regarding Monday’s incident involving Leisha Hailey. Note that the statement says the incident occurred in El Paso, as opposed to St. Louis, as previously reported. I can’t post the link here, but what is it about El Paso and same-sex kissing? Anyhow below is the statement. I’ll try to get more when I’m back on the grid in the a.m.

Updated Information Regarding Customers Removed from Flight 2274

Additional reports from our Employees and Customers onboard flight 2274 during a stop in El Paso on Sunday now confirm profane language was being used loudly by two passengers. At least one family who was offended by the loud profanity moved to another area of the cabin. Although we have reports of what Customers characterize as an excessive public display of affection, ultimately their aggressive reaction led to their removal from the aircraft. We do not tolerate discrimination against anyone for any reason. In this situation, their removal was directly and solely related to the escalated conversation that developed onboard the aircraft.

Our tenets of inclusion and celebration of diversity among our Customers and Employees—including those in the LGBT communities—anchor our Culture of mutual respect and following the Golden Rule. The more than 100 million people who fly Southwest each year reflect the great diversity of our country and our Company — and ALL are valued and welcome. In fact, we’ve been recognized as a leader in diversity throughout our 40 years of service.

Our Customer Advocacy Team reached out to extend goodwill and a full refund for an experience that fell short of the passengers’ expectation.

—  John Wright

Letters • 11.05.10

An open letter to KETK

To Bob Brackeen and Callie Wall of KETK-NBC in Tyler:

A friend of mine, a fellow journalism professor in Texas, just pointed me toward a clip of your “news” segment, “Will Homosexuality Be the Downfall of America?” I will be sharing this clip with my journalism class as an example clueless, baseless, inaccurate, stereotypical bigotry. After reading my students a satirical gay-bashing piece from The Onion, I will show them your segment as an example of what not to do.

I am writing to you from a journalistic perspective about why your show is appalling and anathema to everything journalists should strive to do and be.  Ms. Wall begins the segment by noting that the issue of “gays” being appointed in the Obama administration is “not really gettin’ any coverage.” That’s because it’s not news.

News is based in something we call “facts,” which we define as true and verifiable. Also, news is based in something we call “research” — and it is supposed to be objective. Further, news should adhere to ethical tenets. Your segment failed in every one of these, as well as a few others.

Not the least of your errors is the fallacy involving your numbers, which begins when Ms. Wall breathlessly exclaims about the “record number” of “gay appointments” Obama has made. From an editor’s standpoint, I ask you: How do we know this is a record? Do you really believe there weren’t gay and lesbian government officials prior to 2010? Are you willing to entertain the possibility that people, even going as far back as President Abraham Lincoln, were not counted because they were closeted? A responsible reporter would at least mention this historical angle and the concept of social change.

When the radio shock jock begins his segment by saying Obama appointed “a transgender” as a tech adviser in the commerce department, it almost sounds as though he is expressing concern that person will implement gay-friendly technology for commerce issues. Can you see how ridiculous this is?

I’m not going to waste my words dissecting Garth’s so-called contribution, except to say that it made me question the literacy rate in Tyler, Texas. How in the name of factual, objective reporting could you put this on a news show? Real journalists have named, identified, knowledgeable sources in their news stories, not anonymous callers.

Ms. Wall’s segue of “Some great comments this morning Garth, a good topic as always,” was a dim-witted endorsement of the false question of whether “homosexuality will be the downfall of America.” That is not an objective question. That is homophobic propaganda with a question mark at the end. I might as well ask, “Will Bob and Callie’s idiocy be the downfall of journalism?” Thankfully, I know enough real journalists that this is not a concern.

Good journalists talk to people, not simply about people. I would like to direct your attention to some of the tenets of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics:

• Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.

• Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.

• Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.

• Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.

• Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.

• Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.

• Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

• Examine your own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.

In closing, I would like to help educate you so that you no longer fill valuable air time (this was nearly eight minutes) with what amounts to ignorant bullying.

Your station’s slogan is “News you won’t see anywhere else.” I certainly hope that is true.

Carolyn Nielsen, assistant professor,
Department of Journalism
Western Washington University

………………………

TO SEND A LETTER  | We welcome letters from readers. Shorter letters and those addressing a single issue are more likely to be printed. Letters are subject to editing for length and clarity, but we attempt to maintain the writer’s substance and tone. Include  your home address and a daytime telephone number for verification. Send letters to the senior editor, preferably by e-mail (nash@dallasvoice.com). Letters also may be faxed (214-969-7271) or sent via the U.S. Postal Service (Dallas Voice, 4145 Travis St., Third Floor, Dallas TX 75204). All letters become the property of Dallas Voice.

This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition November 5, 2010.

—  Michael Stephens