By Mike Hiestand
The issue of teen drinking and smoking has long been a common one for high school student newspapers to tackle.
Taking such coverage a step further, a growing number of student reporters have latched onto the idea of engaging in so-called “sting” operations where underage student reporters attempt to purchase – but not use – cigarettes or alcohol in an effort to show how such products get into minors’ hands. Less frequently, student reporters have also sought to purchase other products or services, including illegal drugs, tattoos and body piercings that are either unlawful or somehow regulated for minors.
While such investigative reporting is often exciting and can frequently lead to interesting and important news stories, it is also legally chancy and ethically suspect.
In an effort to crack down on underage consumption of tobacco and alcohol products, many states and the federal government have enacted laws or regulations that prohibit the sale – and often the purchase or even attempted purchase – of tobacco or alcohol to minors. According to the group Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), it is illegal in 37 states and Washington, D.C., for people under 21 to attempt to purchase alcohol. Nine additional states make it a crime for people under 21 to actually purchase alcohol. Similarly, more than 40 states have laws that prohibit youths under 18 from purchasing or possessing tobacco products, according to the anti-smoking group Tobacco to 21.
While their intentions in making or attempting to make underage purchases may be laudable, that won’t necessarily save student reporters from avoiding the consequences should they be caught. The Supreme Court has made clear that journalists generally have no special license to break the law or engage in any other activity prohibited of the general public. While a student reporter may be able to convince police that she never intended to use the six-pack of beer she purchased, police are not obligated to accept her explanation. Additional complications can arise if a faculty adviser knows of and approves his students’ plan to make such illegal purchases.
To avoid the risk of breaking the law, some student news organizations have worked with police, notifying them in advance and obtaining permission to conduct “sting” operations. In a small number of instances, student journalists have even worked hand-in-hand with law enforcement officials. In such cases, student reporters, sometimes wired with hidden microphones or cameras, effectively acted as an undercover agent while government officials looked on. Storekeepers who sold to student journalists were penalized.
While taking such precautions should help student media avoid legal problems, it raises ethical concerns about the credibility of the press as a free and independent source of news. Bona fide journalists are generally loath to put themselves in a position that makes it appear as though they are acting on the government’s behalf. And indeed, avoiding such entanglements probably has much to do with why readers generally trust The New York Times to provide them with reliable and accurate information but don’t have the same confidence in the state-controlled newspapers of China.
Such close cooperation with the government also endangers future newsgathering and reporting. Sources often talk to the press and provide valuable information that they would not provide to police or other government officials. Were journalists to be viewed as quasi-government agents, such sources would dry up quickly.
Finally, criticism of such “sting” operations has come from those who believe they cross the line between journalists legitimately reporting the news and making it, which they argue is an improper role for the press.
To avoid problems – ethical and legal – the better and safer choice for high school student media may be to revert to an old-fashioned stake-out. Rather than making an illegal purchase themselves, reporters can interview sources to find out where, for example, students commonly purchase their cigarettes. If a particular convenience store is mentioned, have reporters watch the store during lunchtime or just after school to see what happens. If they witness a sale, the reporters can then confront both the minor and storekeeper for an explanation.
Obviously, such reporting will usually take more time and effort. It’s also less “sexy.” But it avoids the ethical traps associated with stings – and keeps the reporting staff out of the pokey.