CEO's Goldman defence threatens Reuters objectivity - NY Guild

“Thomson Reuters CEO Tom Glocer shook our venerable media company’s hallowed commitment to objectivity last week when he devoted a blog post to a lengthy defense of besieged Goldman Sachs, a significant client accused by federal regulators of rigging a financial instrument to favor a big customer without informing other investors,” the Guild, which represents unionised employees, said.

The chief executive wrote on his personal blog: “Perhaps (Goldman) will eventually be found liable of these charges, although I rather doubt it.”

What’s wrong with the top officer of a global news and information company exercising his First Amendment rights in a public forum, the Guild asked.

“First of all, it tells Reuters reporters and editors who are covering the Goldman story that the boss is on Goldman’s side. In the newspaper business, press barons and their modern-day corporate successors regularly use the editorial pages to express their opinions about controversial issues. But they have firewalls between news and editorial sections that are widely accepted in the business, even if they’re not so well understood by the public.

“Not so at TR. Without those historic firewalls, the CEO’s publicly expressed opinion could easily be taken as guidance by the reporting staff on how to cover the Goldman story. Fortunately, U.S.-based reporters and editors working on the Goldman story are Guild-covered, which enables them to chase the story without fear of retribution. But for the unprotected frontline supervisors and middle managers who oversee and direct the Goldman coverage, there’s no telling whether the CEO’s latest blog will prompt them to order up certain stories just because they fit Glocer’s opinions.

“Then, there’s public perception. The 160-year reputation of Reuters news as objective and reliable through wars, financial upheavals and natural disasters is one of the reasons clients pay as much as they do for the service and one of the reasons journalists choose to work for Thomson Reuters. Having the CEO take public stands on controversial issues can do nothing but tarnish that hard-earned reputation – and that could threaten sales.”

Debby Zabarenko, Washington-based environment correspondent and head of the Guild unit at Thomson Reuters, said: “What happened to the prized principles of maintaining the appearance and the reality of objectivity? Our members and the company’s clients deserve nothing less.”

The Guild noted that the Thomson Reuters Trust Principles say, among other things, that “the integrity, independence and freedom from bias of Thomson Reuters shall at all times be fully preserved”. Does Glocer’s defence of Goldman Sachs violate the principles? Former editor-in-chief and general manager Michael Reupke seems to think so, the Guild said. It quoted Reupke’s letter to The Baron on Tuesday in which he said “It is quite outrageous… for any executive of Reuters, and now surely equally of Thomson Reuters, to express an opinion on the Goldman Sachs affair. Are the Trustees too sleepy to think of stepping in here? If this had happened in my day I doubt whether he could have survived in his job.”

Zabarenko said Glocer’s “extremely inappropriate” comments “could not only tarnish the company’s reputation but that of all Reuters journalists who work hard at being objective. He should disavow his comments immediately.”

The Guild urged Schlesinger to reconsider a union suggestion in February that he issue a statement to the staff and to the public asserting that it shall be the company's policy that no high-level Thomson Reuters executive, sales executive or any other non-editorial manager shall interfere with, or even inquire about, any news story or project that is in the works or being contemplated, and direct the Board of Trustees to appoint an independent ombudsman to act as an advocate for editorial within the organisation.

“By reporting directly to the Trustees, this Editorial advocate would be unfettered by the chains of command in the corporate structure and could credibly monitor, report on and advise on matters affecting editorial integrity,” it said. ■