Star’s coverage of Tory met journalistic standards
The Star faced some harsh criticism after our exclusive story last week about Mayor John Tory’s extramarital affair with a young woman in his office.
As we know, the report, by city hall reporters David Rider, Ben Spurr and Alyshah Hasham, resulted in the mayor officially resigning Wednesday night over what he had earlier called a “serious error in judgment on my part.”
Much of the criticism, which came in the form of letters from readers and some phone messages, has been directed at the Star’s decision to publish the story at all.
“Running a story, about a politician’s private life that does not suggest that he is in any way unfit for or unable to assume the burdens of his office, is not journalism I want to be associated with,” reader Louis-Phillippe said in a letter to my office.
His letter typifies what many others told us. A Forum poll found that Torontonians were evenly split on whether Tory should have resigned. It’s the reaction, along with our rationale for running the story that I delved into as public editor this week.
At the root of much of the reader response is the accusation — completely false, I must strongly note — that we deliberately set out to destroy Tory’s reputation and force him from office. Those cries will no doubt grow louder in some quarters now that Tory has finalized his decision to leave.
Some hate has been directed at Rider, the Star’s city hall bureau chief, a smart, seasoned journalist who led the reporting on the story. In refuting claims that we purposefully tried to oust Tory with our investigation, Rider told me the Star had a very cordial relationship with the mayor during his time in office.
“He always answered our questions and praised our journalism even when it made him uncomfortable. We didn’t call for him to resign and had no desire to force him out of office … that was purely his decision,” Rider said.
In interviews this week, including with other media, Rider spoke extensively about how he and the other reporters carefully gathered the facts for their report and confirmed, including with Tory himself, that it was completely factual. (I won’t get into all those details, but you can go online and search for these interviews, including one Rider did with the Star’s podcast “This Matters”).
Rider did tell me about the vitriol that came at him. Readers called him a host of awful names — including low-life, a--hole, and d--k. He received one threat of bodily harm — “watch your back” — a sinister note not as easy to brush aside.
Most of the hate mail he received came from women, strangely enough, he noted. “Not quite sure how to process that,” Rider commented in a tweet.
Michelle, one reader, angrily asked in a letter: “Are you proud of yourself? Hiding under politicians’ beds to see who they are f---ing?” She later added: “why should anyone care who is f---ing whom?”
What direction does the Star’s journalistic standards guide give on the issue of privacy? The guide says that while every person has a right to privacy, there are “inevitable conflicts between the right to privacy, the public good and the right of the public to be informed about the conduct of public affairs.”
Star editor-in-chief Anne Marie Owens elaborated on that point in a way I conclude is spot on. She told me that politicians are entitled to privacy and this is a boundary the Star respects as a news organization.
“However, there are times when private affairs become a public concern. When we received a tip that Tory was in a relationship with a woman who had worked in his office and had travelled on several publicly funded trips with him, we felt compelled to investigate,” Owens said.
The issue was not the extramarital affair, a private matter; it was the ethics of a relationship between the mayor and one of his subordinates, Owens continued.
“An extended affair with a junior adviser raises questions about an imbalance of power and Tory’s conduct and judgment while in office. Our understanding, as a culture, of the ethical difficulties of such relationships has evolved in recent years,” Owens said, referring to the #MeToo movement and the public awareness raised around women’s rights and power dynamics in work environments.
Politicians, in particular, are, and should, be held to a high standard of professional ethics, Owens said. “Council’s code of conduct calls on members to perform their duties and arrange their private affairs in a manner that promotes public confidence and bears close public scrutiny. Did Tory abide by the code in this case?”
As public editor, I would say that answer came in large part from Tory himself, who said in his press conference last week that his actions with his staffer “didn’t meet the standards to which I hold myself as mayor …”
(The Star chose not to name the 31-year-old woman involved with Tory, because the individual, no longer works for the mayor and does not hold public office, therefore, her conduct was not the focus of our examination, Owens added).
I reached out to Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly Ryerson) journalism professor Marsha Barber, a media ethics expert, for her take on the Star’s investigation.
“The big question is, was the Star’s reporting in the public interest? Yes it was and it certainly met journalistic standards,” she said.
“If you’re having an affair with a staffer who reports directly to you, the public needs to know about that. If there’s a power imbalance the public needs to know,” Barber said.
“The reason is, when you are elected to public office, you are acting on behalf of your constituents. So, if there is anything questionable, it’s in the public interest to know.” Sound words, in my view. Barber went on to say that while she believes there was no “imperative” for Tory to step down as mayor, he “made his declaration and is to be commended for that. “He feels he has let the public down.”