Inconsistency undermines story’s credibility

So declared the little voice inside my not-so-little head, recalling the ancient axiom: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” Axiom author: Ralph Waldo Emerson. Bright fella. Trouble is, he never caught “Action News.” Might’ve mitigated his consistency bugaboo.

Granted, news stories often thrive on inconsistencies, hence the drama – conflicting accounts of the same crime/accident/disaster/disagreement from multiple sources, each claiming the others are full of an unpleasant substance.

Truth in dispute fuels the news. Basic facts, though, are expected to remain constant. Minute to minute, anyway.

Such was the expectation when KTNV-TV, Channel 13 last week did a follow-up on school and city police breaking up a melee near Chaparral High School — perhaps with excess vigor — with some footage captured on a cell phone camera. (Not to be confused with Chaparral High’s bigger headline of last week: a teacher arrested for sexual misconduct with a student.)

“Some say officers may have crossed the line,” anchor Steve Wolford tells us in his setup. “Some”? That’s technically more than one, but usually understood (and dictionary-defined) as considerably more. Yet only one student was interviewed, while another student was cited but not interviewed.

“School police say they only did what was necessary to stop the fight, but one parent disagrees,” Wolford continues. No parent is interviewed, nor is there even a standard “so-and-so did not wish to appear on camera” to confirm contact.

Describing what precipitated police action, reporter Blake McCoy termed it a “massive brawl.” The aforementioned student claimed he was walking by and was roughed up by cops who mistakenly thought he was part of the fight. Then McCoy cited “the other student involved,” who, he claimed, was also taken down by cops for intervening on the first student’s behalf.

Upsetting if true, but it’s reporting only on two students, both of whom said they weren’t part of the “massive brawl” that drew cops to the scene in the first place — and of which there was virtually no reporting, even though it was ostensibly the central event. No explanation of how many students were involved, or if they also alleged excessive manhandling, or of how it happened, or of any consequences for the brawlers. Neither interviewee — the self-described bystander student nor Sgt. Darnell Coutagn of the school police – offered details on the brawl, Coutagn speaking only generally: “Each fight has its unique set of circumstances.”

Which left us with McCoy announcing: “It is said to have been such a large one that Metro had to assist school police.”

Generalizations galore. “Some say” and “It is said to have been” are lazy attributions. We’re asked to trust the reporter — ill-advised given deep distrust of the media — rather than offered quotes, numbers and facts.

Details and hairsplitting? Yes. Yet it adds up to nagging doubt, a story that feels somehow off. None of it proves the info false, just inconsistently reported — and by extension, suspect.

“Some” to one, “one” to none, explanations mysteriously MIA, casual assurances of trust-us-it-did-happen and trust-us-they-did-say-it.

Sorry, Waldo, but try this: Inconsistency is the hobgoblin of journalistic minds.

Contact reporter Steve Bornfeld at sbornfeld@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0256.