In light of the ombudsman's gradual disappearance from the world of journalism,
Jeffrey Dvorkin has moved to defend the necessity of the position, in an article published yesterday entitled "Journalism's Last Line of Defense." Dvorkin was the ombudsman at
NPR from 2000 to 2006.
Dvorkin discusses in detail his experience as ombudsman during the Second Intifada in the Middle East, a time during which NPR was heavily criticized by listeners for pro-Palestinian reporting. Although he acknowledges the rigors of the job, he suggests that having the position of ombudsman gave the NPR much more credibility.
We have discussed previously
the necessity of having an ombudsman for both print and online publications, particularily to uphold a publication’s credibility.
Interaction with readers helps the news organization understand how their reporting is being perceived by a wider public. According to Dvorkin, talking to a real person within the organization also helped to placate some enraged listeners following inevitably polarizing coverage of the Middle East.
"Overall, I think that -- for NPR -- having an ombudsman to catch the
flak was better than a defensive silence, which is how many other news
organizations dealt with criticism of their coverage," Dvorkin said.
Dvorkin contends that most newspapers view the position as a luxury that is not cost-effective. However, a study conducted by the Guardian in London showed that the cost of litigation actually drops whenever there is an ombudsman on staff, by as much as 30% a year.
