EDITOR’S NOTE: Covering tragedy

EDITOR’S NOTE By Hank Kalet Discussing readers’ responses and concerns.

   A reader posted a long response on our Web site to last week’s Page 1 story updating the status of Joshua Aanestad.
   Joshua is the 16-year-old from South Brunswick High School who faces criminal delinquency charges in connection to the crash that killed his 15-year-old friend, Richard VonDeesten. Joshua was the driver in the crash, which police believe was intentional, the result of a suicide pact between the two friends.
   Last week, we reported that Assistant Middlesex County Prosecutor Nicholas Sewitch had filed a motion in state Superior Court in New Brunswick asking that Joshua be tried as an adult, which would up his potential sentence if convicted from a maximum of 20 years in one of the state’s juvenile jails to a sentence of 30 years to life in prison.
   Given the public interest in the case and the criticism by a not so small segment of the community of the prosecutor’s decision to even consider trying Joshua, we made the decision not only to write a story but to run it on the front page.
   That didn’t sit well with some. A Web response from reader Traci Singer was very critical of our decision.
   "I would like to know how or why the South Brunswick Post feels that this story is serving the community?" she wrote (I have edited the response for basic grammar and punctuation). "Think about the number of children that South Brunswick has lost over the past few years, think about Josh’s family, his two sisters that are still in the S.B. school system, and think about all the friends of Rich and Josh’s who will read this story. Isn’t it tragic enough without it being dredged up every week? Don’t our kids have enough to deal with?
   "This paper claims to be the heart of South Brunswick," she continues. "I say you need to have a heart and stop printing useless facts about a tragedy that affected so many people in our community. If this paper truly cares about this community, you will let our kids grieve for the friend they know and loved, and pray for the friend that so desperately needs help."
   She continues by criticizing the assistant prosecutor’s approach to the case and then asking that we imagine ourselves — meaning the staff at the Post, but also, I believe, Mr. Sewitch and the community at large — as Josh’s family, or Rich’s, how they must feel seeing coverage of the aftermath of the crash on the front page of the paper week after week.
   She then says she will cancel her subscription (in a subsequent e-mail, she changed her mind).
   I stand by the decision not only to run last week’s story, but also to place it on Page 1, and I stand by the decisions we’ve made from the moment we first heard about the crash. As I told Ms. Singer in an e-mail responding to her posting, we have made every attempt not to sensationalize our coverage and that we make every effort to take into account the impact our stories have on our readers and the people involved.
   "In this case," I wrote, "we have to weigh what might be the families’ concerns, the news value surrounding the charges and the criminal proceedings, the impact on the community, etc. We are not arbitrarily keeping the story alive – it will remain so until a decision is made on a trial and the trial is concluded. The prosecutor’s decision to file the motion, whether right or wrong, is news."
   I believe that Ms. Singer’s view, while legitimate, is in the minority. I’ve heard from a significant number of readers who thanked us for finding an effective balance on this story between the need to report the news and the need to be sensitive to the South Brunswick community.
   I am hopeful that this Web posting from Robb O’Beirne, made in response to Ms. Singer’s, is more typical of the feelings of our readers (though I’m not sure I agree with the conclusions he reaches about the two teens).
   "Thank you for keeping us updated (as you should) about this tragedy and its aftermath," he wrote (again, edited for grammar). "Perhaps if kids realize the implications of their actions, such drastic measures can be avoided in the future. Throughout this entire situation, your paper has shown, and continues to show compassion balanced with fair and thorough reporting."
   Please let me know which side of the fence you fall on in this discussion.
The Editor’s Note column will run as often as necessary as a way to explain the workings of the South Brunswick Post to our readers. So, please, send me your questions about the paper, about the news business, about the decisions we’ve made and any suggestions you have. I’ll try and answer as many as I can in future Editor’s Notes. Call me at (732) 329-9214, write me at P.O. Box 309, Dayton, N.J. 08810 or e-mail me at [email protected].