Today’s edition features an article that is sure to spark controversy on campus. Because of the unusual nature of this particular article and the multiple anonymous sources that it contains, I would like to take a moment to explain the ethical decisions that went into the publication of “DERU.”
The Daily first obtained the current roster of Deru members in October. For weeks, we sat on the information, interested by the list but unaware of a compelling reason to publish it.
But as time went by, we gradually realized the importance of publication. While Deru members constitute just 1 percent of one class of Northwestern students, they are funded by all those who pay tuition and they impact, in some way, the life of every student on campus.
The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics commands us to “recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in the open.” Because of the impact of this organization, we felt the need to tell our readers about it.
Unfortunately, the current 22 members of Deru each declined to speak on the record with The Daily. It was then that we considered offering anonymity, which we rarely extend. The SPJ Code asks us to “identify sources whenever feasible.” But in this case, some information about the organization could not be feasibly obtained any other way and we felt it was important enough to warrant granting anonymity.
There are three anonymous sources quoted in the article: one current Deru member and two former Deru members. Each presented a compelling reason for anonymity and offered important information that our readers had a right to know.
A second major ethical dilemma concerned the disclosure of the current Deru roster. We met with Deru members multiple times before publication to discuss the issue.
In many ways, we understood the argument for running a story without the names of the current members: The SPJ Code requires us to “minimize harm,” and publishing the names could produce tension for individual members, some of whom may not have been completely forthright with friends, classmates and student group co-chairs about their membership in the organization. In addition, we considered the potential benefits secrecy, in some circumstances, can afford to the effectiveness of an organization.
In the end, we decided the public service done by publication of the names outweighed its potential harm. This is not a matter of national security; it is one of campus politics. And while Deru’s behind-the-scenes proceedings may lead to fewer headaches and more ease in decision-making, they do not necessarily produce results that serve the student body in a fair and representative way. Publishing the names makes the members accountable.
We believe strongly in the famous words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best disinfectant.” It is our fervent hope that the publication of this article will bring more accountability to the organization and will ultimately impact the student body in a positive way.
Editor in Chief Brian Rosenthal, a Medill senior, can be reached at [email protected].
