I've posted this in other people's journals, but I'm going to post it here too. The PolyCentral discussion group was infiltrated by an undercover reporter a while back and you can view the video clip of the news report they did here: http://cbs4.com/video/?id=25701@wfor.dayport.com
Overall, I thought the piece was good, but I had a few things to say about their tactics for going undercover and that rude safety comment at the end. I've tried writing emails to the station and the reporter directly as well as her editor, but have received no response. I received corrected information about their method of "asking permission" and have since revised my letter. They claim they asked permission to attend the meeting and were denied permission. First of all, if they were denied permission, they shouldn't have been there with a hidden camera. Second of all, they contacted only the general administrative email address for the group who did put out a feeler on the mailing list, to which no one responded (keep in mind it is a discussion group, with a notice on the website that they are not a "voice" of the poly movement and they are not a media contact). They did not do even a cursory google search, because if they had, they would have found
![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
smoocherie's website, who is a poly activist and quite possibly would have agreed to an interview, and through her, I would have, as would many other people. Third, I recently found out, that their "request" to interview us was made AFTER they infiltrated the group with a hidden camera! The initial email request is dated after the meeting. So, here is my letter to the station:
First of all, PolyCentral is a discussion group, and we intentionally choose not to be considered a "media" group or to be singled out as a "voice" of the poly movement, but many of us individuals within the group are willing to voice our personal opinions and statements about polyamory to the media. You asked the generic email of a discussion group to talk with you, you did NOT ask any of us as individuals if we would be willing to talk to you. And certainly, with very little research, you could have found many of our members personal websites (including myself and the woman featured in the clip) and could have contacted any of us directly and we would have been happy to give an interview or statement. At the very least, if you had come to the meeting openly as reporters and asked if anyone there was willing to go on camera, you would have found many willing volunteers, including the couple that was featured. And I know FOR A FACT that your request to talk with us was made AFTER the hidden camera violated our meeting - I have the email request with the date and I know the date of the meeting.
Second, if we supposedly declined, you had NO RIGHT to bring a hidden camera to a meeting that our visitors view as a safe, protected space to discuss a difficult and sensative subject. Not only did you violate that meeting, you may have done irreversable damage to the group as a whole. Because of pressure from society, many poly people are not public with their choices and it is only in the sanctity of a safe poly meeting, among other friends and family, that they can talk, question, and air their issues among peers and other understanding people. We welcome new people to our group so that they, too, can find a safe place to learn about polyamory. Knowing that any "new" person may be a reporter in disguise can severely hamper the feeling of safety we try to offer people. Try doing that to an AA meeting and see what kind of legal trouble you find yourself in.
Third, you may have blurred out the faces, but the voices were clearly recognizable. That is not protecting their identities, as I discovered this clip and immediately identified all people in the clip even before they spoke.
Fourth, you didn't even get the facts right. The couple in the clip are not married and the individual is not the "Leader", he is one of the co-founders. Many of us are intentionally not married and we are not happy about being portrayed as a group of married couples who seek outside sex partners.
And finally, what I am most pissed about is the snide comment at the end about safety issues that was not asked of any of the poly people featured in the clip. The poly community as a whole is extremely safety conscious, probably moreso than the monogamous community, and we were not given a chance to rebut that particularly rude comment. Many of us have fluid-bonded contracts, condom-contracts, HPV Boundaries, frequent group and individual STD testing, and we are far more aware of the dangers than your average US citizen. We are EXTREMELY concerned about safety and that was never once addressed in the piece, leaving room only for your anchor people to make a rude comment at the end, implying that we are a health risk to ourselves and even the general population.
I feel you have failed in your job as reporters by not being ethical or thorough in your data-gathering and in not showing an unbiased and complete story, allowing your anchor people to inflict personal negative bias into the piece, in not doing even minimal effort to locate Florida individuals who would have accepted a request for an interiew, and in infiltrating a discussion group that you claim denied you access to the group in the first place but in fact, you violated before you ever asked for permission! I believe that your station owes the poly community a public apology, and you owe it to the general public as well for misrepresenting us.
It's such a shame you did such a poor job on this segment, because the rest of the piece was fairly accurate and this kind of negative, unethical behaviour regarding your subject matter and your reporter's techniques can overshadow any possible good the piece could have done.
Sincerely,
Shara Smith
http://www.theinnbetween.net
-------------------
Anyone who wants to write, here are the email addresses I have found:
http://cbs4.com/contact
news4@wfor.cbs.com
http://forums.miami.com/kr-miamiopinion/start (Miami Herald Speak Up Online)
HeraldEd@MiamiHerald.com
ivarela@wfor.
killeenm@wfor.
As we can see, the media is out there and aware of us, and they will get the story they want, with or without our cooperation. I suggest to anyone for whom this affects, that we take this opportunity to revise our previous DADT and closeted polices. It is far better for the media to publish what we tell them to publish, than to try and hide ourselves and let them come get the information *they* want, rather than what *we* want. Secrets only have power over us if we give them that power. I realize that some people are still affected by close-minded policies about work and family, and it is reasonable for these people to be concerned about privacy. For everyone else, while I'm not recommending we fly the poly flag on our front porches, we still need to be aware that the media will come looking for us, so we should take this situation as a warning of things to come and prepare ourselves with planned invitations to the more ethical reporters and media representatives (like Montel Williams) and prepared statements that are difficult to take out of context or chopped into more offensive statements to be used for their own purposes.
