Wayne Innuendo? Stop by and see the evidence

Editor’s note: Although it is not our general practice to run a byline with an editorial, due to the nature of this topic, we feel we should point out that this piece was written by Josh Wengler on behalf of our editorial staff.

In recent weeks there has been a surge in the number of people who publicly claim The Wayne Independent has been practicing “yellow journalism.”

Our accusers say this is because we’ve been presenting information without any basis in fact: Lies, to put it plainly.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

For those who don’t know, Webster’s New Universal unabridged dictionary defines the term “yellow journalism” as “The use of cheaply sensational or unscrupulous methods in newspapers, etc. to attract or influence the readers.”

In this business, it is universally accepted that the phrase stems from the runup to the Spanish American War, in which two fiercely competitive New York City newspapers run by William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer ran misleading and even false “news” stories for the purpose of building support for war and taking circulation from their competitors.

In no way does this define what we do here. We have no interest in drumming up support for anything other than the truth and we have nothing to gain from printing those truths.

In the two newspapers the term was coined to refer to, the publishers of those papers had vested interests in competing with their rivals and pursuing their political agendas. We do neither.

The news stories we report come from the reporters themselves and are not edited to make them fit anyone’s personal views.

The claim that we pursue the stories we do to sell more newspapers is also senseless. Our reporters’ compensation does not increase based on circulation. In the newsroom, we make the same amount of money regardless of how many people read a particular piece. If we do sell more newspapers, that’s good because we’re a private business, but it is not our motivation. Also, if more people are reading, it means more people see just how their elected officials are behaving, for better or worse.

In recent months, we’ve run stories that have made some people uncomfortable. Of that there is no doubt.

While we regret the need to run such stories, we make no apologies for these actions, just as the officials we’ve accused of wrongdoing have no intention of apologizing to us for making our jobs more difficult than they needed to be through their refusals to speak or release documents.

This makes us wonder what the reason for such refusals could be. Why not just answer the questions honestly and release the documents requested? If our elected officials have nothing to hide, why all the apparent secrecy?

In our view, such persistent and apparently widespread resistance to openness in the operation of local government is arrogant at the very least and very suspicious at worst.

Either way, we would be remiss if we simply chose to ignore it out of a desire to steer clear of scandal — as distasteful as the scandal may be.

The controversial stories we’ve run in recent months have presented only documented facts proven by documents in our possession or the words of the people involved in the stories themselves. We don’t quote anonymous sources and we don’t say something is fact unless we have the proof in our hands.

Anything less would not only be unethical, it would be stupid.

Those who would accuse us of printing unsubstantiated innuendo without calling us or stopping by to see the proof we say we have are guilty of the exact thing they say we are guilty of.

How’s that for stupid?

We are human beings. As such, we are not infallible. We may not lay the story out as clearly as it should be each time, leaving ourselves open to criticism in that regard.

By the same token, reasonable people can take exception to our word choice in a particular story as one Texas Township woman has done in recent weeks.

People with complaints like these or any other are encouraged to contact us. Better yet, write a letter to the editor and we’ll be sure to print it. Heck, if it’s a particularly good one, we may even put it on our website so the rest of our readers can comment on it.

If you really think we’re doing this community a disservice with our reporting, come forward and add to the discussion. So far, the vast majority of the feedback we receive has been hugely positive.

We are a community newspaper. Therefore, we are beholden to the community we serve. If we do not serve it well, we will not sell papers and we will all be out of a job. It’s as simple as that.

If you’re so convinced we are printing false information, first come see the information we have. If you’re still convinced, get your like-minded friends and neighbors to call and let us know you’re unhappy and how we can fix it.

Of course, you can always just complain about us to the people you already know agree with you, too. That’s always an option, though it is an ineffective one.