Thread: Reporter's deceit was inexcusable (Jose Vargas)

Reporter's deceit was inexcusable

Dick Rogers
Tuesday, June 28, 2011

You might not recognize the name Jose Antonio Vargas from the nearly 100 stories he wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle from late 2000 to 2004, but chances are much better you know it now.

In an article for the New York Times Magazine on Sunday, Vargas disclosed that he has been in this country illegally since 1993, when he was 12. He said he learned of his immigration status four years later, before embarking on a successful journalism career and a pattern of lying and falsifying documents to keep his secret from employers and the government.

It wasn't the first time he told a story about coming to America. In 2002 he wrote in The Chronicle that his mother put him on a flight from the Philippines to begin a better life with relatives in the United States. But the story ignored the key element that defined much of his experience: his illegal status.

In an e-mail, Vargas, who went on to write for the Washington Post and Huffington Post, said he omitted his status "because I was afraid and fearful of the consequences."

That's exactly the point. Over his career, what else did he fail to report or write? It's difficult to divine. The majority of his stories were routine: fires, crime, features. He also wrote often about diversity and immigration. Just as it's hard to prove a negative, it's hard to know whether Vargas listened sympathetically to some and less so to others, whether he was more inclined to hear one side of a story than others, whether he omitted information that hit too close to home.

He insists not, that his commitment to journalism overcame his willingness to mislead and prevaricate for personal reasons.

"As for the stories, I don't think the lies I had to tell to keep working and surviving have any correlation with my news stories - my work," he said in the e-mail. "No reporter writes a story alone. I always worked with and answered to capable, thoughtful editors - sometimes layers of editors - to make sure the stories are fit enough to publish."

It's not an argument that carries weight with Chronicle Editor Ward Bushee.

"While he deserves sympathy for his efforts to become a citizen, Vargas' lack of forthrightness in some of his reporting cannot be defended," Bushee said. "He practiced a pattern of deception that was not only dishonest, but disrespectful of his readers and fellow journalists at The Chronicle."

In 2003 Vargas described the Mission District hawkers who traffic in fake driver's licenses and the necessity for them. It was a story that never would have been taken at face value had the paper known that Vargas himself carried a falsely obtained license. Less than two months later he covered a planned protest against then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's repeal of a bill that would have given illegal immigrants the right to drive. Neither story included critical comment or explored opposing views.

Vargas acknowledges that he felt conflicted about covering immigration, particularly the driver's license story, and asserts that he sought to avoid the subject (the archive shows that he wrote four during his Chronicle tenure).

It's true that no story finds its way into the Chronicle without being touched by many hands. But an editor can't be fully capable and thoughtful when denied crucial information. Vargas unfairly holds the paper responsible for factoring in something he didn't reveal. Journalists must avoid even the appearance of conflicts of interest to protect their integrity and help assure that stories are written without fear or favor. A news reporter who engages in a neighborhood development dispute shouldn't be allowed to cover the issue. A reporter who has personal ties to a campaign or cause should not be allowed to cover it.

To uphold the standard, an editor has to be informed. Vargas, of course, could not reveal his secret without putting himself in personal and professional jeopardy. Ambitious and enamored of journalism, he chose to keep the paper in the dark. In that sense, he put himself above the interests of the paper and the readers.

Asked what documents he presented to The Chronicle when he was hired in 2000, he referred to his New York Times Magazine piece: "For more than a decade of getting part-time and full-time jobs, employers have rarely asked to check my original Social Security card. When they did, I showed the photocopied version, which they accepted. Over time, I also began checking the citizenship box on my federal I-9 employment eligibility forms."

On his Facebook page, Vargas lists a favorite quote from James Baldwin: "I want to be an honest man and a good writer." But Vargas himself provided an early clue that he was not above board. In 2001, while still a college student studying journalism, he confessed in a Chronicle article that he told friends, fellow students and teachers that he scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT test - an exam he admits he never took.

In an information age when opinion is king and Internet search engines filter for results you already agree with, the notion of conflict-of-interest rules and even-handed coverage is commonly seen as quaint and outdated. It's the public's loss.

Vargas has taken on a new role, campaigning for passage of the DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors). It would provide a path to permanent residency for young people who share Vargas' status and have shown themselves worthy.

He still considers himself a journalist, and he's right. He writes with skill, and his background and life experience give him entrée where others might hit roadblocks. But it's a different brand of journalism.

Vargas is an advocate and should openly write as such. The question is, was he always an advocate in disguise? With the clarity of hindsight, readers can't be faulted for wondering.

Dick Rogers is the former readers representative for The Chronicle. To comment, go to sfgate.com/chronicle/submissions/#1 .

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 1K3KPV.DTL

RELATED

Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Jose Vargas an illegal alien, will fight for Dream Act

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-241467.html

I don't know much about this award but is there anyway they can strip him of it? Anything he published is suspect because he has proven himself to be a liar.

Originally Posted by sugarhighwolf

I don't know much about this award but is there anyway they can strip him of it? Anything he published is suspect because he has proven himself to be a liar.

Taking Back Nobel Prizes
NYTimes.com
The committee can reconsider some of its selections and . . .
http://ethicist.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ... el-prizes/