Notes on a journalism tragedy

I've always thought that when you're close to a journalist, be on your best behaviour, because have the ultimate method of revenge: writing.

Once again this theory was proven right in the modern day wonderland called Finland. This week this country has been talking about one thing above all: how a newspaper sacked its editor before she even begun her new job as the editor.

Why was she sacked again? Well, it depends who you belive. According to the former editor, it was because she is gay and in registered relationship with another woman, whom she refers as her "spouse".

Then again, if you will believe the chap who sacked her, the former editor's sexuality didn't play a part but the fact that she "lied" during the job interview process - about her "spouse" (she didn't specifically mention that in her case the word spouse doesn't mean a man), and the other thing being her "spouse's" political activity; apparently editor's neutral statues is affected if her partner is politically active one and was registered to be a nominee at up-coming elections.

Now, who to beliebe? Sorry men, but my side is with the journalist, in this case, the now former editor. So I do understand how hurt she must feel knowing that no matter how intelligent and experienced she is as a journalist and editor (after all, she was headhunted to this job another post as the editor - she was in fact the editor of the Journalist, the magazine of all journalists), in this case, it doesn't matter - only her sexuality does! HELLO, this is FINLAND, not a Bible Belt state at United States of America. This is 2008, not 1950s. If sexuality would really matter, why she wasn't ASKED about it directly? Hint: that would be against the current Finnish law. Besides, I don't really think that gay editor would write diffently than a streight one.

And to be honest, being a young journalist myself, and as someone who knows quite a lot of journalists, I have yet to meet a bunch of journalists who would not know a lot of inside information about each other and about the known figures of this small, but great nation.
My aunt and her friends do know a lot more than they have the time to tell - so, really, was this editor so good that she managed to keep her gayness a secret from everybody, at all times? Can those men who hired her really honestly be unaware about that? Ok, whatever.

Anyways, this case has turned out to be The News Story the media company probably wanted to avoid. People have arranged hug and kiss protest for the editor, the newsrooms around the country have shown their outrage and asked the man who sacked the editor and the now-editor, both men, to be sacked - they have handled the situation so poorly that the journalists are hurt, angry, and believe that both the newspaper's and the whole company's reputations have been severely damaged. And the readers have reacted, too. They have done what they can do: canceled their subscriptions and told their reason to the customer service personel honestly.

And to make it worse for the media company: the police is planning to investigate the case, too. They want to know if the now sacked editor will sue or not, if she won't, they will investigate the matter anyway. Discrimination, that's what the police will investigate.

So, who lied and about what? Should the editor have clearly said that she's gay or not? She said that she always calls her spouse "spouse", so naturally that was the word she used when asked if her family would be willing to move should she get the job. And if the political activity of her spouse is such an issue, why it doesn't matter that other newspaper's editors have politically active spouses and that isn't an issue? I mean, come on, just because that editor is a man, it shouldn't make any difference... And if the editor's sexuality would have been "okay" with the man who sacked her, why is it really an issue? Do streight people specifically mention clearly that they are streight during a job interview? Nobody has ever asked me that guestion - because it really doesn't matter! Gay or streight, the real important issue in journalism is how you write, how you wil do your job? If you suck as an editor, you won't be editor for that long time, period.

What is the outcome of this mess? Time will tell the real results. One thing is for sure: this is strongly a battle of the values. Making assumptions is a bad, bad thing. If the men thought that the editor would go down quietly with a story like this, they made the understatement of the year. And a journalist has nicely support from other journalists, which is clear. The police and the legal system might be doing their conclusions at some point, but the media company has already taken hits where it hurts the most - finance and reputation. Should this story keep on living, their next move is crucial. The public these days will vote with their consumption choises. If the economy goes down the drain, the luxury items such as newspapers - which already sugger - will be among the first to go. And after a case like this, who would blame the consumers for the outrage? I sure don't.