When media outlets freely hand their pulpit over to advocacy groups, they cease to produce news.  This is, unfortunately, exactly what’s been happening in recent progressive press coverage of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in Durango.

A quick site search of the Colorado Sun, KSUT (Four Corners Public Radio), and Colorado Public Radio (CPR) shows that the differing outlets might have indulged in this to varying degrees, but indulge they did.

Looking in detail at some of the coverage reveals a startling lack of subtlety.  In an Oct 31 piece titled “Advocates: ICE kept Durango family in windowless room with only chips and water after mistaking father for someone else” printed in the Sun, and then reprinted in KSUT, a quick word count shows 282 words of the article (out of 555 total) were given over to things that either immigration advocates said, those helping the family said, or to things the family said, which were relayed to the reporter.

 A little hearsay between allies

An example wasn’t hard to find.  Quoting:  “No female agent was available to help the 12-year-old girl, the family told advocates. Jaramillo-Solano likened their detention to torture, and alleged that both he and his son were physically assaulted.  ‘Every time I asked what would happen to my children, or if they could have something to eat, they hit us. They told me I did not matter. They told me my children did not matter,’ Jaramillo-Solano told the resource center.”

Compare this to 65 words given to the other side, the bulk of which was the reporter’s characterization of testimony given in a Denver court by an ICE official. The remainder is short enough to quote here:  “An ICE spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment Friday.”

KSUT added to the pile with a radio interview, sitting down with someone from Compañeros, one of the immigrant advocacy groups whose name comes up over and over again in coverage. If KSUT did a similar interview with ICE, I couldn’t find it.

Back when I started writing about the Colorado news media, I would reach out (more often than I do now) when I had questions about their process or when I felt that I should offer them a chance to speak their piece. I remember once getting a sermon emailed to me by Colorado Sun reporter/editor Jesse Aaron Paul detailing the extraordinary lengths they go to in order to give both sides a chance to weigh in, sometimes (if memory serves) waiting weeks and making multiple attempts at contact.

A look at that in the light of their Durango reporting, the timing involved, and the fact that the reporter took the time to put “immediately” in front of her description about ICE not responding, and it makes me wonder if Paul’s extraordinary lengths don’t apply to ICE or situations involving immigration.  Alternatively, could it be a change in their policy?

Big claims go unverified

Further, if you read these stories closely enough you will note some serious allegations are made by immigrant advocates and others, without a corresponding amount of evidence for them. Were they simply so juicy that reporters forwarded them along without any skepticism or double-checking?  If some basic fact checking weren’t feasible, where’s that oft-repeated “without evidence” tag they stick in front of anything Trump says?

There should have either been some independent verification, or a note that reinforces the fact that none could be found.  How else could you judge the strength of the claim?  Simply slapping the oft-used journalistic fig leaf of “advocates say” in front of something, especially the kinds of claims anti-ICE advocates are making, is not enough.

Go back and review the quote I took above.  Torture.  The advocates are forwarding an allegation that physical abuse happened.  That’s big.  Yet, the article doesn’t have a direct accusation from the alleged victim to the reporter.  It’s something relayed to her by advocates.  Advocates who very much have a dog in the hunt.

For the reporter to blithely pass this along, dust off her hands, and then move along shouldn’t pass muster as journalism.  The much-touted journalistic process, the one that reporters trot out to show us how professional they are, doesn’t seem to be working in this case.

To be sure, actually adhering to the standards you claim might come at a cost–it might mean being behind other new outlets in getting something up on the internet–but we all have choices to make.  You as a news consumer cannot control the choices that any given news outlet makes. You can, however, learn to recognize what you’re being fed, and categorize it appropriately.

Get in the habit of being fair minded, even when what you read is not.

Cory Gaines teaches college physics and is a regular contributor to Complete Colorado.  He lives in Sterling on Colorado’s Eastern Plains.  He also writes at the Colorado Accountability Project substack.