What if Journalists Had to Disclose Drug Use?

Republican drug-testing advocate Trey Radel is caught with cocaine, and the political media screams “hypocrite.” But there’s another hypocrisy to consider.

WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 9: U.S. Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL) speaks during a press conference, on Capitol Hill, July 9, 2013 in Washington, DC. The Republican leadership discussed the immigration bill and the Obama administration's decision to delay a portion of the Affordable Care Act, which will extend the deadline for employer mandated health care to 2015. 
National Journal
Ben Terris
See more stories about...
Ben Terris
Nov. 21, 2013, 10:04 a.m.

When Rep. Trey Radel was ar­res­ted and charged with pos­ses­sion of co­caine, the me­dia vul­tures came out. And why wouldn’t they? He was the first sit­ting mem­ber of Con­gress since 1982 to be ar­res­ted for a drug crime. What made the story even juici­er for many was the hy­po­crisy that a man with a coke habit would sup­port le­gis­la­tion that would re­quire drug test­ing for food-stamp re­cip­i­ents.

But some mem­bers of the me­dia wondered if there was an­oth­er hy­po­crisy at play here. One that in­volved them­selves.

“How many re­port­ers are re­cus­ing them­selves from the Radel story? How many should be?” tweeted Ry­an Grim of the Huff­ing­ton Post, who used to work for the Marijuana Policy Pro­ject and whose book in­cludes the line, “One day in the fall of 2001, I real­ized that I hadn’t seen any LSD in an aw­fully long time.”

It’s an in­ter­est­ing ques­tion. Should journ­al­ists have to avoid cov­er­ing drug is­sues if they have been drug users them­selves? Or should they at least have to dis­close their own use?

Friend and col­league Mike Riggs at At­lantic Cit­ies, whose own past drug use has been well- doc­u­mented by him­self and oth­ers, says they ab­so­lutely should.

“Any journ­al­ist who does drugs, and doesn’t be­lieve they should be jailed for it, has a mor­al ob­lig­a­tion to dis­close their drug use when writ­ing about fel­low trav­el­er who’s been screwed by the sys­tem,” Riggs says. “I think if every per­son who works in me­dia/polit­ics in D.C. and who’s vol­un­tar­ily used il­li­cit drugs in, say, the last few years stepped for­ward en masse the drug war would be over to­mor­row.”

As a journ­al­ist who is pro-leg­al­iz­a­tion, Riggs clearly has skin in the game bey­ond just what the So­ci­ety of Pro­fes­sion­al Journ­al­ists has to say about dis­clos­ing con­flicts of in­terest. And in this world, he is not alone.

“[Dis­clos­ure] might go a long way to­ward mak­ing our cov­er­age of the drug war less douchey and more hon­est,” says CJ Ciara­mella of the Wash­ing­ton Free Beacon. “However, in prac­tice, con­sid­er­ing most of the journ­al­ists I know, it would be­come more of an is­sue of space con­straints than eth­ics. Full dis­clos­ure: I’ve done marijuana, hash oil, co­caine, Ad­der­all, Rital­in, LSD, mush­rooms, salvia, MDMA, yel­low jack­ets, Hy­droxycut, and whatever was in that weird Chinese li­quor that a Phil­lies fan gave me.”

Ciara­mella is not a com­plete out­lier (though his list is par­tic­u­larly … im­press­ive). Al­len St. Pierre, who runs the Na­tion­al Or­gan­iz­a­tion for the Re­form of Marijuana Laws, says D.C. journ­al­ists have a stor­ied his­tory of il­li­cit drug use, much of which happened at parties hos­ted by NORML at the O Street Man­sion in Dupont Circle.

“To this day I could still end ca­reers all over this town, in aca­demia, for­eign ser­vices, politi­cians, and of course journ­al­ists,” he said. “Those journ­al­ists today may be some of your ed­it­ors.” (My ed­it­ors deny this).

But just be­cause some journ­al­ists use drugs, does that mean they are not qual­i­fied to re­port on the mat­ter without risk­ing their own ca­reer or fu­ture em­ploy­ment op­por­tun­it­ies with dis­clos­ure? First, there’s the fact that mem­bers of Con­gress — elec­ted by their con­stitu­ents to serve them hon­or­ably — should prob­ably be held to a high­er stand­ard than lowly journ­al­ists (bi­as alert). It’s al­to­geth­er pos­sible that the world would be a worse place if even few­er re­port­ers felt they had the abil­ity to call out the most power­ful mem­bers of our so­ci­ety.

Plus, as man­aging ed­it­or of the Wash­ing­ton City Pa­per Jonath­an Fisc­her puts it, he just doesn’t quite see the con­flict.

“Cur­rent or past drug use doesn’t ne­ces­sar­ily have any bear­ing on how well one does one’s job, so in the ab­stract, I simply don’t see it as a bi­as or con­di­tion worth dis­clos­ing,” he says. “Un­less the re­port­er is secretly the vice pres­id­ent for com­mu­nic­a­tions of the co­caine lobby, the fact that he has done co­caine shouldn’t really mat­ter much to his re­port­ing on the drug, ex­cerpt per­haps by giv­ing him a bet­ter fa­mili­ar­ity with the ba­sic terms of art.”

There, of course, is also the ques­tion of where you draw the line on the con­flict of in­terest. Do gay people writ­ing about gay mar­riage need to put their sexu­al­ity on every news story? Does a story about un­der­age drink­ing re­quire ad­mit­ting to that one party in high school where you drank an en­tire bottle of Jim Beam?

There are plenty of con­flicts more sub­stan­tial and more pre­val­ent than il­leg­al drugs that come up on a daily basis in polit­ic­al re­port­ing. Even in the case of Radel, is it not pos­sible that the cov­er­age is colored more by polit­ic­al bi­ases than drug-re­lated ones? There are cer­tainly more non-dis­closed Demo­crats writ­ing about the “tea parti­er” Radel than there are people who have done a line of coke.

“All of that said: I would love to see a Wash­ing­ton journ­al­ist — es­pe­cially a Cap­it­ol Hill re­port­er — write a first-per­son piece about co­caine use among journ­al­ists, politi­cians, and oth­er Hill types,” said Fisc­her of the City Pa­per. “Hell, I’d run it this week.”

No takers here.

What We're Following See More »
A DARK CLOUD OVER TRUMP?
Snowstorm Could Impact Primary Turnout
2 days ago
THE LATEST

A snowstorm is supposed to hit New Hampshire today and “linger into Primary Tuesday.” GOP consultant Ron Kaufman said lower turnout should help candidates who have spent a lot of time in the state tending to retail politicking. Donald Trump “has acknowledged that he needs to step up his ground-game, and a heavy snowfall could depress his figures relative to more organized candidates.”

Source:
IN CASE OF EMERGENCY
A Shake-Up in the Offing in the Clinton Camp?
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

Anticipating a primary loss in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Hillary and Bill Clinton “are considering staffing and strategy changes” to their campaign. Sources tell Politico that the Clintons are likely to layer over top officials with experienced talent, rather than fire their staff en masse.

Source:
THE LAST ROUND OF NEW HAMPSHIRE POLLS
Trump Is Still Ahead, but Who’s in Second?
1 days ago
THE LATEST

We may not be talking about New Hampshire primary polls for another three-and-a-half years, so here goes:

  • American Research Group’s tracking poll has Donald Trump in the lead with 30% support, followed by Marco Rubio and John Kasich tying for second place at 16%. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton 53%-41%.
  • The 7 News/UMass Lowell tracking poll has Trump way out front with 34%, followed by Rubio and Ted Cruz with 13% apiece. Among the Democrats, Sanders is in front 56%-40%.
  • A Gravis poll puts Trump ahead with 28%, followed by Kasich with 17% and Rubio with 15%.
IT’S ALL ABOUT SECOND PLACE
CNN Calls the Primary for Sanders and Trump
21 hours ago
THE LATEST

Well that didn’t take long. CNN has already declared Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump the winners of the New Hampshire primary, leaving the rest of the candidates to fight for the scraps. Five minutes later, the Associated Press echoed CNN’s call.

Source:
×