Activism vs. journalism

A friend testily asked why I had originally written that two Montreal women had "claimed" they'd been bashed. The friend supposed I'd been playing "journalist," in essence placing the commands of mainstream career over the bonds of politics and community.

I had indeed been playing journalist. But I was also enforcing a personal rule that everyone should consider: Don't believe everything you're told.

The e-mail announcing the assault became a sort of electronic virus, inundating mailboxes within hours. It was a stunning show of the web's power. It was also the sort of story that everybody wants to believe... it was almost too perfect. An unseen assailant attacking two unnamed women while they kissed. It was important to bring the story to the attention of readers, but I did not have the time that day to research it myself. And I wanted to make that clear in the post.

The two women did identify themselves and speak out, one has an obviously broken nose, the media followed the story, police are taking the report seriously, and the kiss-in did occur. The community came together to support the women and make a statement. All these are good things.

But that doesn't change the need for skepticism. I don't believe something just because it's appeared in my inbox. Neither should you.

Regular readers of this blog will note that I didn't, for example, question whether Focus on the Family nutbar James Dobson had indeed called SpongeBob SquarePants a homo: I referred to it as fact. I just believed it when I read it on the wire service. Some stories really are too perfect to question.