GREAT INJUSTICE BY THE MIAMI HERALD

On Friday, September 8, the Miami Herald published a front-page article with the heading “10 Miami journalists take U.S. Pay.” As I read the headline, I was confused. For a moment, I thought I had committed a crime, for I also take U.S. pay, receiving a pension from the United States Postal Service for which I was proud to work for close to thirty years. Once I got into the smaller print, what the Herald was referring to became clear. My confusion went away, but only for anger to take its place.

When a paper goes “front-page,” it must be important news. From all this brouhaha, one would think they had discovered some great swindle, or uncovered some corrupt network; but no, that was not it. The big story was that a number of Miami journalists received pay for working for TV or Radio Marti. El Nuevo Herald, the Spanish-language counterpart to the Miami Herald, fired two of these journalists, citing as cause the violation of company policy regarding conflicts of interest.

Jesús Díaz Jr., president of the Miami Herald Media Co. and publisher of both newspapers felt the receipt of compensation constituted a violation of a “sacred trust” between the media and the public. When that is the case, Díaz does not believe “...integrity and objectivity can be assured" (Page 2A). The article goes on to quote a number of so-called “experts” on ethics who, of course, agree with the Herald’s position. So much for the prosecution’s case, but I bet you the defense could find an equal or even greater number of “experts” on ethics to arrive at the opposite conclusion. I consider myself adequate in my knowledge of ethics.

First, I would say to Mr. Díaz that the integrity and objectivity of reporters should always remain in question regardless of circumstances. That human beings have unfounded biases or justifiable opinions—whichever is the case—is a fact. Journalists are not exempt. The liberal media in America has long produced garbage reporting aimed at supporting despots like Castro. Undermining American institutions and principles does not seem to bother them. These people do not report the news objectively. They report them subjectively, following their own agenda. Whether or not they receive money from sources outside their media outfit is inconsequential. In fact, voicing anti-American opinions only for the money would be to their credit. At least, they would not be so stupid as to believe the trash they feed the public.

Second, I would say to Mr. Díaz that the integrity and objectivity of those who own or publish newspapers should always remain in question regardless of circumstances. Awful thoughts come to my head. For example, Castro was able to plant a spy in the Pentagon. Could he plant one in the Herald, someone who could suggest investigative stories? That is a good question. One wonders why the Miami Herald has a two-year ongoing investigation that includes TV and Radio Marti, but also extends to any Cuban exile organization that receives money from the U.S. Government. Why are they so interested in finding “caca” in these places? Could it be to enhance Castro’s image and discredit the exile community?

Catering to that miserable dictator would probably help a newspaper open up a major bureau in Cuba. One also wonders with whom the owners or the top brass of the Herald socialize. There are many money-hungry business owners—people without a conscience—who would like the U.S.A. to normalize relations with Cuba so they can make a buck. They use the “to help the people in Cuba” excuse, but we all know where they are coming from. In any event, who knows what an in-house in-depth investigation would turn up? Naturally, this is all wild speculation, however, and not worthy of our consideration. I believe the Miami Herald would not stoop that low. That is the truth. Those who manage the paper have worked very hard to establish a good reputation, and that is the key point in my firm rejection of the Herald’s position.

All those journalists you besmirched in your story have excellent reputations, a standing in the community they worked very hard to maintain. To insinuate the possibility they would contemplate receiving what would amount to a bribe—payment for an opinion not their own—is unconscionable. I know you did not say that, but you stated there is a clear conflict of interest they should have recognized, and that is not the case. There is nothing clear about it.

One would have to be an intellectual midget to confuse the letter of the law with the spirit of the law. Obviously, if a newspaper reporter covers the insurance industry, I would not want him or her receiving payment from the insurance industry; and if a reporter covers politics in Washington, D.C., I would not want him or her receiving money from the President’s office or any political party. No reporter needs to defend TV or Radio Marti, however. As Americans who believe in democracy and freedom, we should all defend the mission of TV and Radio Marti. Only communist sympathizers, other enemies, and those with a special commercial agenda would decline.

The great sin of these journalists was to uphold the principles they appropriated long ago when they rejected Castro’s communist dictatorship and chose to come here. The great sin of these journalists was to try to bring the Cuban people the news Castro censors in Cuba. The great sin of these journalists was to tell the truth. Anyone who calls it propaganda is someone who does not believe in freedom and democracy. It is as simple as that. Therefore, as our good friend and reporter Juan Manuel Cao said, between TV Marti, Radio Marti, and us there was a “coincidencia de intereses,” a coincidence of interests, rather than a conflict of interest.

What news subject could there possibly be on which TV or Radio Marti would try to influence the opinion of these good people? I bet you none, because there is congruence of ideals and of belief in the American way. TV and Radio Marti sought out these journalists because of their knowledge and credentials. If anything, they influence the thinking of TV and Radio Marti officials with their honest opinions, not the other way around. In summary, do not be so self-righteous Miami Herald that you put into question the reputation of good institutions and honest people. You are not above them, I am sure of that. Respect the integrity of those who have earned our trust, as you would wish us to respect yours.

If there is a possible conflict of interest in this situation, I find it in all those directors who went along with the decision to publish the article and fire those journalists. Were they afraid of doing the right thing for fear of losing their jobs? Was there not any intelligent person in the Herald with guts enough to fight the feeble-minded authors of this crime? Nobody defended Pablo Alfonso, Wilfredo Cancio Isla, or Olga Connor. What kind of camaraderie is that? It is a shame, and the only way to make it right is for those people to get their jobs back, and for the Miami Herald to issue a good-hearted apology. We will forgive you, if you are intellectually and morally honest enough to admit your mistake.