THE HERALD FAILS TO APOLOGIZE FOR ABUSE OF POWER

On Sunday September 17, Jesús Díaz Jr., the publisher of the Miami Herald attempted to clarify the reasons behind the firing of Herald reporters who were receiving pay for working at TV and Radio Marti. He failed to address certain questions convincingly.

Mr. Díaz cited Miami Herald policy, in particular this statement: “We demonstrate our principles by operating with fairness, accuracy and independence, and by avoiding conflicts of interest, as well as the appearance of conflicts of interest. Our news operations will be diligent in their pursuit of the truth, without regard to special interests.”

That same day, Ana Menéndez, a Herald reporter accuses Cuban exiles of being melodramatic, this coming from someone who often adopts outlandish positions, perhaps just to be contentious and establish that kind of a reputation. I guess controversy helps sell newspapers. Menéndez feels we overreacted. “Anywhere else it might have been just a controversial personnel issue,” she writes. Well, Ms. Menéndez, if the Herald had addressed those personnel issues in-house and in private, we would not be having this discussion. If the Herald felt there was a duty to disclose the information to its readers, why did it have to go front page? Answer these questions Ana. Who is being melodramatic in this whole situation? Who started it all by making a mountain out of a molehill?

In any event, getting back to Mr. Díaz, let us talk about fairness, since the Herald's policy statement requires it. Was it fair to publish your findings in the front page? Was it fair to include in that report journalists that do not work for the Herald? Was it fair to link this case with the journalist who took $240,000 to promote the government’s agenda? Are they in any way similar cases? By your standard of accuracy, was that accurate reporting? Finally, was it fair to give the impression these journalists were engaging in some unlawful activity? Was it fair to try to ruin their reputations?

On the subject of conflicts of interest, I must quote Mr. Díaz again. He says, “Our decisions, painful as they were, reaffirm our commitment that reporters and editors at our newspapers are free of even the hint of a conflict of interest.” That will never happen, Mr. Díaz. The reason is the absence of financial gain does not guarantee the nonexistence of a conflict of interest. It seems to me conflicts of interest also exist for ideological reasons.

For example, a reporter who believes in communism and the censuring of the press could work within our free press system to try to weaken democracy and the stability of our government. An ideological bias would taint his or her opinions, infecting the public accordingly. Instead of moving to a communist or totalitarian country, he or she would choose to work here. Using our free press to try to destroy it, and our way of life, is a conflict of interest.

Suppose the Herald decides to hire people who worked for the government media in Cuba. If they espoused the government’s ideology then, what is to assure us they have changed their minds? If they only did it for the money, can we trust their integrity? Therefore, because of ideological biases, if not a lack of personal integrity, no newspaper can guarantee its reporters are objective and free of a conflict of interest. Somebody should inform the Journalism Board of Ethics about it. I am informing the Herald.

In an attempt to clarify the Herald’s position on a number of questions and rumors, Mr. Díaz states that the paper has no plans to open a bureau inside Cuba. Then, he goes on to say, “Cuba rejects or does not respond to our requests for visas for our reporters.” Well, Mr. Díaz, which is it? Do you want to have reporters working in Cuba or do you not? Anyone could think you wrote what you wrote, the way you wrote it, to please the Cuban government, so that they would not reject your requests for visas in the future.

The reason for all these rumors and questions is that you violated your own policy, giving the appearance that a conflict of interest exists. Otherwise, why would you use the front page and the accusatory tone of that article to discredit reputable Cuban-exile journalists? Because the appearance that a conflict of interest exists, people can also put in question the objectivity of those “undercover” staff reporters the Herald has in Cuba now.

As regards the Cuban television program Mesa Redonda, Mr. Díaz is confident no one at The Miami Herald is passing information to the Cuban government. How can he be so sure? Castro planted the spy Ana Belén Montes in the Pentagon. Does Mr. Díaz feel the Herald has a tighter security system, better than the one at the Pentagon?

When it comes to conflicts of interest, there is a difference between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law. The accused journalists are ideologically transparent. Every one knows their history as supporters of democracy and the principles that make this country great. Communicating those same views at TV and Radio Marti confirms their integrity and objectivity. A conflict of interest would exist if they had received pay for giving different views in some leftist media outfit. As your policy statement states, they were “...diligent in the pursuit of the truth, without regard to special interests.” They told the truth as they saw it, beliefs they had appropriated many years before. The word “propaganda” has a negative connotation. When used by the Cuban government to promote their nefarious system, it is false information. When used by TV or Radio Marti, propaganda equals truth, since it promotes the values of our superior democratic system of government. Anyone who disagrees with that statement is ideologically tainted, someone who does not believe in the American way of life.

If we do not have a free press, Mr. Díaz worries about who will protect us from the abuses of power in government. Although the public still has minds to think and fight the government with, that is a point well taken, and I commend the Herald for its many successful investigations fighting corruption in our communities. However, I would like to go further and ask, “Who will protect us from the abuse of power in the media?”

In my opinion, to the detriment of those accused and to the detriment of the true and faithful Cuban exile community, the Miami Herald is guilty of abusing its power to communicate with the public in this situation. More perplexing is the realization an apology is not coming our way.

What have you accomplished Mr. Díaz? We will no longer benefit from the expert reporting of those you fired. Reporters of Cuban origin or otherwise will now decline working for TV or Radio Marti for fear of public humiliation. What—with his usual sarcasm—Carl Hiaasen calls charity pay, I call payment for professional work. Unlike most Americans, in the Herald’s criterion, I guess journalists should not aspire to bettering themselves and their families by doing some extra work in their chosen field.

Instead of supporting a free press, your actions help block and undermine the freedom of the press. The people in Cuba will suffer for it, and we here in Miami are suffering for it. In my name and in the name of the many who feel like me, Miami Herald, I hold you in contempt. Mr. Díaz, may God give you the wisdom to see the light and the courage to make amends.

Joseph Marchante