🚀 go-pugleaf

A halfpage story in the NY Times About Sandy Nelson 

Gay Reporter Wants to Be Activist
by Timothy Egan
The New York Times, 8/10/96

Tacoma, Wash., Aug. 9--To labor leaders in this old blue-collar port, a 
shot-and-beer stronghold, Sandy Nelson is an unlikely hero--a lesbian, 
socialist journalist.  But to the top editors at The News Tribune, where 

Ms. Nelson works, she is a walking conflict of interest whose off-duty 
activities threaten the credibility of journalism.  

For six years, Ms. Nelson, who is 40, was a beat reporter and feature 
writer at The News Tribune, the dominant daily paper in this city of about 
200,000.  In her nonworking hours, Ms. Nelson was a leader of an 
unsuccessful campaign to protect gay rights in Tacoma.  And she belongs 
to a leftist group, the Freedom Socialist Party.

In 1990, the paper removed Ms. Nelson from all reporting duties, citing 
her role in a campaign for a gay-rights ordinance, which voters ultimately 
turned down.  Though she never covered gay issues--her primary beat was 
education--the paper said Ms. Nelson's political work could provoke 
doubt among readers about The News Tribune's commitment to professional 
objectivity.

She was reassigned to the copy desk, where she remains as an editor, a 
job she considers drudgery and an affront to her career.  She sued the 
paper, asking to be reinstated as a reporter.  But a superior court judge 
here ruled against her last year, sayi ng the newspaper had a right to 
insist on political restrictions to protects its credibility.

Now, on appeal before the Washington State Supreme Court, her case has 
attracted wide national interest from three disparate sources:  gay 
rights, journalism and labor.  And the case has become embroiled in 
larger issues of how much employers can control what their employees 
do after work.  The American Civil Liberties Union has taken up Ms. 
Nelson's case because, it says, the newspaper's action against her poses a 
threat to free speech.

In a recent court brief on behalf of Ms. Nelson, lawyers for labor unions 
wrote:  "Between the hours of 9 and 5, the average person's life is not 
her own.  Even one's rights as an American citizen largely disappear when 
one goes through the office door. This situation is tolerable because it 
is limited to working hours."

Labor leaders say their main interest in Ms. Nelson's case is in fighting 
the effort by the newspaper to control what employees do when they are not 
at work.

"You have the right to go out after work and act for your own political 
interest," said Robby Stern, a lobbyist for the Washington Labor Council, 
which represents 400,000 union workers in this state.

But journalists, unlike aerospace mechanics or pipe fitters, are 
restricted from most political activity by the very nature of their work, 
say The News Tribune and its supporters around the country.  They say 
reporters understand, as a condition of their job, that they will not 
become active in political parties or campaigns.  It is a conundrum that 
journalists have long struggled with.

"This is not about neutering political activity," Cameron De Vore, a 
lawyer for The News Tribune, argued before the Washington Supreme Court 
earlier this summer.  "What is at stake is credibility."

Mr. De Vore said that when reporters "become news makers rather than 
news reporters, they have broken the compact" between readers and the 
paper.

Beyond Ms. Nelson's case, newspapers have dismissed reporters for 
activities like publicly endorsing abortion rights, becoming an 
alternate delegate to the Democratic National Convention or marching 
against the Vietnam War and the Persian Gulf war.

Many journalists limit their political activity to voting.  Some do not 
even go that far.  Leonard Downie Jr., the executive editor of The 
Washington Post, has said he does not vote because of the potential for 
conflict.

Ms. Nelson, a 13-year-veteran of newspaper work, says such restrictions 
are posturing and somewhat phony.

"Let's be honest.  Every journalist approaches the news with some 
natural human bias," she said.  "My job as a reporter, I thought, was 
to be fair, balanced, skeptical and thorough.  I never lost my 
credibility.  But in my off hours, am I supposed to give up all my 
political rights?"

She said the fact that her political work was in gay rights was also a 
factor in her reassignment, an assertion that the paper denies. 

"Where do I draw the line?"  Ms. Nelson asked.  "I don't think you 
should be covering something in which you have a personal interest, 
or in which you stand to make money.  But journalists need to be 
involved in their community."

Among Ms. Nelson's supporters is Ben H. Bagdikian, a former dean of the 
Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California at 
Berkeley.  

"In general, reporters ought not to be actors in the theater they cover," 
said Mr. Bagdikian, a former assistant managing editor at The Washington 
Post.  "What seems to me unfair in the Sandy Nelson case is that her 
activities did not interfere with her reporting."

Ultimately, he said, a newspaper has the right not to publish an article, 
or edit the article to conform to its standards of objectivity.

The ambivalence among journalists toward Ms. Nelson is reflected by the 
National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association, which has more than 700 
members nationwide.  The group's board has decided not to work take a 
position on Ms. Nelson's case.

A former board member, Lily Eng, a reporter at The Seattle Times, has 
strongly opposed Ms. Nelson's argument.

"Journalists should not be activists," Ms. Eng said.  "We have to have 
the trust of the community.  Once we start actively taking sides on 
issues, we lose our credibility."

But Ms. Eng said gay journalists faced a dilemma when dealing with 
perceived threats to civil rights.  Because the issue is so close to 
them, she said, many gays journalists find it difficult to maintain the 
fine line between professional objectivity and the need to speak out.

Outside of journalism circles, Ms. Nelson's case is the first to test a 
new Washington State law that was written to protect employees' political 
rights.  The law, approved by voters in a 1992 initiative, prohibits 
companies from discriminating against e mployees for "in any way supporting or 
opposing a candidate, ballot proposal or a political campaign."

Lawyers for The News Tribune say the law was intended to prevent employers 
from forcing their workers to contribute to a certain campaign--not to 
protect journalists from a perception of bias in their reporting.  But 
civil liberties advocates say Ms. Nelson's case is precisely what the law 
was set up for.

Ms. Nelson continues to work a daily 9-to-5 shift as a copy editor while 
remaining active in the Freedom Socialist Party and gay rights issues.

At a news conference last year, she pointed out that two Seattle newspapers 
had contributed discount advertising space to a political campaign that 
sought voter approval for a new major league baseball stadium.  Ms. Nelson 
asserted that their actions were an example of the very kind of breach of 
ethics she is accused of.

But the newspapers say newsroom activities are kept separate from the 
advertising departments, which lent support to campaign.

			*  *  *  *  *

For more information or to send a donation: Sandy Nelson Defense Committee
P.O. box 5847, Tacoma, WA 98415  (206) 756-9971   hnoble@eskino.com