Street Roots maintains an internal set of criteria and considerations regarding interview practices for unhoused Portlanders. Compassion and consent lead the way.
Street Roots often receives praise from readers for including the triumphs, concerns and experiences of unhoused Portlanders in its coverage of homelessness. While it may seem obvious that coverage of homelessness should include the perspectives of people experiencing homelessness, it’s not a standardized practice in Portland’s media landscape — despite that same landscape existing in a city where homelessness is an official city emergency for the better part of a decade.
However, when and when not to interview homeless Portlanders on the record isn’t quite so cut and dry. Regardless, most of us know the bad coverage when we see it — often the biggest problem is a lack of perspective from the people being repeatedly demeaned, criticized and otherized over the course of a several-minute segment or lengthy story.
There’s the more sensationalized coverage, often from local TV news where journalists hide out near encampments in hopes of capturing a moment of illegal or obscene behavior with the cameras rolling, planning to package it with a dramatic voiceover, slick graphics and call it an “investigation.”
There are the casual panning shots of streets full of tents, produced by someone holding the camera from the comfort of a passing vehicle. Snippets of press conferences featuring frazzled business owners and officials are common, too.
Often, the struggling masses of homeless neighbors are used as muted B-roll so as to not focus on the faces of those at the press conference or the journalist narrating the segment for too long. Maybe there are a few comments from a frustrated (housed) neighbor — an iteration of the classic “man-on-the-street” interview.
When considering whether or not to approach people for on-the-record interviews, we remember the fact that many people are uncomfortable speaking to press, and that many unhoused Portlanders have had negative or even traumatic experiences when interacting with media, which can compound that discomfort for unhoused neighbors.
To many news consumers, it seems in the hours of writing, interviewing, filming and editing stories about homelessness, someone could have spoken to a homeless person. Certainly, if a group of homeless Portlanders were to organize a protest or press conference of their own, these same outlets would interview those who are being organized against — it would be unfair to breathlessly cover the plight of the homeless Portlander and the criticism they lob without interviewing those they’ve criticized.
For whatever reason, that fairness doesn’t always cut both ways in local coverage. Street Roots tries to avoid the one-sided nature shown in much media coverage.
Street Roots has an internal set of criteria for interviewing unhoused Portlanders on the record, as well as taking photos and videos. The criteria are guided by our experience, as well as the Society of Professional Journalists, or SPJ, Code of Ethics. The four major categories of the SPJ code are as follows: seek truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently, and be accountable and transparent.
Regardless of whether or not we ultimately publish or name unhoused Portlanders, we talk with them about stories concerning homelessness. This allows us to hear about what people are going through and helps guide our questions. This practice is foundational to seeking truth and reporting it.
When considering whether or not to approach people for on-the-record interviews, we remember the fact that many people are uncomfortable speaking to press, and that many unhoused Portlanders have had negative or even traumatic experiences when interacting with media, which can compound that discomfort for unhoused neighbors. Additionally, as is the case with sweeps, we’re often hoping to speak with people about traumatic experiences (unrelated to the media). If a story is purely about data, or accountability for officials, asking someone to relive that trauma for the sake of a powerful quote or checking a box isn’t prudent.
If the story can dedicate the appropriate amount of time to one person and their experience, then we may approach people for an on-the-record interview. Again, we remember to minimize harm and ask ourselves if this interview can result in a vulnerable member of our community experiencing harm. As was the case with Street Roots’ story on the city repeatedly posting many homeless encampments before actually sweeping them , approaching people who are posted but not yet swept for comment on the city’s practices seemed it could result in the city prioritizing that camp of dissenting voices the next time around.
When it comes to the July 6 story on abatements , the unhoused Portlanders interviewed for the article have already found new places to pitch their tents. The available data was scant, so there was room for interviews. We decided to pursue and publish these on-the-record interviews. Due to the heightened amount of trauma amongst unhoused Portlanders in Old Town, Street Roots took an additional step of focusing on vendors — people who already understand how interviews will be used (informed consent) and have easy access to accountability if they feel their experiences were misrepresented (be accountable and transparent).
For photos and videos showing people and/or their tents, it’s cut and dry: Get informed consent. An emphasis should be placed on “informed.” Have we explained where and what we will do with these photos and videos? Have we explained how many people may see them? If we do that, and the answer is ‘yes,’ we may choose to publish them. While some may correctly argue there’s nothing illegal about filming or taking photos of people in public spaces, good journalists know the law and sound ethics don’t always line up. In fact, the SPJ Code of Ethics recognizes this disparity under minimizing harm: “Recognize that legal access to information differs from an ethical justification to publish or broadcast.”
Other relevant passages in the SPJ Code of Ethics are “avoid pandering to lurid curiosity, even if others do,” “show compassion for those who may be affected by news coverage,” and “pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance or undue intrusiveness.”
Regardless of which interviews, photos and videos Street Roots chooses to publish or not publish, Street Roots works to ensure it publishes the entire truth in a compassionate and thoughtful way. In seeking truth and reporting it, Street Roots' staff reminds itself it's not "the truth," if it only encompasses the viewpoints and experiences of powerful people, and it's not ethical if it harms those without power.
Street Roots is an award-winning weekly publication focusing on economic, environmental and social justice issues. The newspaper is sold in Portland, Oregon, by people experiencing homelessness and/or extreme poverty as means of earning an income with dignity. Street Roots newspaper operates independently of Street Roots advocacy and is a part of the Street Roots organization. Learn more about Street Roots making a one-time or recurring gift today
© 2022 Street Roots. All rights reserved. | To request permission to reuse content, email editor@streetroots.org or call 503-228-5657 , ext. 404
