I think we can all agree that one of the important features of any story is context. That all-important element that tells the reader/listener/viewer how today’s story fits in with other events or history.
Then why oh why in this story — Interracial Couple Denied Marriage License By Louisiana Justice Of The Peace — did it take the reporter so long to mention that the actions of the justice of the peace were unconstitutional? And then to put that information as part of a quote (from that highly suspicious organzation the ACLU) instead of hard cold facts?
I am sorely disappointed that the reporter did not take the 5 minutes to look up the case herself.
She got the who, what, where, etc. just fine. But lost the context that what the JP was doing was made unconstitutional 42 years ago. This is not a recent decision.
Okay, so this is a Huffington Post filing. Maybe there was no editor to question the lack of additional information and the lack of a link to the Loving case. This is the problem with too many editorless entries. There is no one to ask questions and to push for better reporting.
If there is to be a new model for delivering the news, let’s at least hold to some traditional values such as getting the facts right and providing context.