Journalist to Cops: What’s the Real Story on Fuhrman?

For some time now, I’ve been kicking around a column idea about the similarities between cops and reporters. On the surface, that sounds like a column on the similarities between cats and dogs. The general perception is that the two professions view each other with varying degrees of rancor and mistrust, so (always looking for ironic twists), I thought I could get some mileage out of showing how much we have in common.

Originally, that was as far as the idea went. And that is still my working premise, but with a new wrinkle--in the form of a question--thrown in at the end.

For starters, cops and reporters are part of large bureaucracies. Street cops have their commanders and, ultimately, the brass leading to the chief of police. Street reporters have assigning editors and a maze of superiors that leads to the editor or publisher. Both cops and reporters spend a fair amount of time second-guessing their bosses and feeling underappreciated.

Both institutions are fundamental to American society. We in the press prize our duties in keeping the democracy informed; the police prize their role in keeping the society safe. Without each performing its duties, the democracy suffers.

Both police and press have the power to help and hurt. In their best moments, police literally save lives or thwart danger. On their best days, journalists right wrongs and inform the public on innumerable subjects--some even relating to the public’s health and safety.

The flip side is the power to hurt. A mistake by a police officer, even an honest one, can be fatal. Mistakes can imprison people wrongfully. For the journalist, mistakes can damage people or institutions’ reputations. Metaphorically speaking, journalists have the power to “put people away” just as police do.

We both are given wide constitutional latitude to carry out our roles. Each may feel restricted from time to time, but we both operate under a “color of authority” that provides sweeping power not available to the average citizen.

In exchange, we try to convince the public we’re deserving. In both cases, judgment and integrity are essential. If the public thinks either element is lacking, credibility in the institution disappears, with a resulting significant setback to the society.

Rookie cops and rookie reporters begin their careers full of idealism. Each in their own way wants to save the world. Each envisions their careers being more rewarding personally than financially. Along the way, a high percentage of cops and reporters become cynical about how much they can achieve.

Both groups are criticized by the public. Critics contend that cops are insensitive, bullying and selective in carrying out their duties. Journalists’ critics say the same thing about the press.

Cops and reporters tend to respond similarly to those charges. Critics, according to cops and reporters, don’t understand the nature of their respective jobs--most specifically, the pressures and limitations that come into play.

In professions involving tens of thousands of people, both press and police are vulnerable to the misdeeds of individuals. When a lone cop screws up, his police force is tainted, if not law enforcement in general. When a lone reporter screws up, his newspaper pays a price, as well as the journalism business.

All these similarities lead me to my question. It is directed to any cop who wants to address it.

My question comes in light of the Mark Fuhrman disclosures, in which the former Los Angeles detective talked about planting evidence and framing or physically abusing suspects and non-suspects. Keeping with our comparison of the two professions, the journalistic equivalent of a Fuhrman would be a reporter known by his peers to make up quotes or fabricate stories for the purpose of “getting” people.

It’s inconceivable to me that someone like that could survive 20 years as a reporter. Someone would blow the whistle.

Common sense tells me that Fuhrman’s views couldn’t have been a secret from any number of police colleagues, just as no journalist who makes up stories could fool everyone over a long career.

In professions built on public trust, both cops and journalists know that the consequences of nurturing people like Fuhrman can be devastating, as the Los Angeles district attorney’s office may discover.

So, the question to police is, how can a Mark Fuhrman spend a career without someone turning him in? In a profession where most people take the high road, how could Fuhrman be allowed to prosper?

Whether cop or reporter, one final similarity must exist:

In both professions, the answer to the question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” must be yes.

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by writing to him at The Times Orange County Edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626, or calling (714) 966-7821.