Is the Olivia Nuzzi/ RFK Jr secret relationship a conflict of interest or business as usual?
A once iron-clad ethical standard is now up for debate. That's bad news for political journalism.
What’s wrong with political journalism? Nearly everything. Long-held news reporting norms are continuing to shift, even evaporate in the age of Donald Trump. Now another journalism standard is biting the dust. It’s one of the oldest in the ethical canons: conflicts of interest must be avoided. Once widely accepted by mainstream news outlets, it now seems that a growing number of journalists think this is just optional guidance. Sexting with a source? No big deal. Writing stories that criticize the opponents of that source? Apparently fine. Promoting that same source on other news outlets? Also okay.
Of course, the recent scandal I’m referring to is the one involving the New York Magazine wunderkind political reporter Olivia Nuzzi and the whale beheader, bear cub dumper, and former third party presidential candidate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The pair recently admitted a nine-month secret sexting relationship during which time Nuzzi penned stories about Kennedy along with his opponents, President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. You’d think that condemnation of that behavior would be widespread, but you’d be wrong.
I expect a “who cares about ethics” response from right-wing propaganda outlets like Breitbart. But to hear some of the same from mainstream journalists is truly shocking.
“I’m supposed to care about this? Here we have a brilliant reporter with impeccable prose and a matchless ability to find a riveting through line in a story. This is a nothing burger.” That’s a quote from Caitlin Flanagan, a writer for the prestigious Atlantic Magazine who apparently thinks that it’s no big deal for a reporter covering the presidential campaign to have a secret romantic entanglement with one of the presidential candidates.
Here’s editor Ben Smith in his weekly newsletter for Semafor: “…our policy here at Semafor is that if you’re having a romantic relationship with a subject of your coverage, for the love of God tell your editor.” Tell your editor? Is that all? What about removing yourself from the coverage itself? Apparently, that’s not required of reporters who work for Smith. Wow. Just wow.
Smith, Flanagan and others seem to have forgotten that journalism is important so long as journalists seek the truth and maintain a sacred trust with news consumers. Conflict of interest, whether by crooked politicians or compromised journalists, breaks that trust. Period.
Photo Credits: Stefani Reynolds AFP/Getty Images; Rebecca Noble/Getty Images
I vehemently disagree with efforts to minimize, if not outright dismiss, concerns about the propriety of a secret romantic relationship with one of your news subjects. As I wrote: “Just to be crystal clear: Nuzzi was in a romantic relationship with one of Joe Biden’s opponents WHEN SHE WAS REPORTING & WRITING this highly critical article about Biden. That is journalism malpractice full stop. Any media types who say otherwise also have questionable ethics.”
Former New York Times public editor and current journalism ethics professor Margaret Sullivan agrees: “Don’t get romantically or sexually involved with your sources; if you do, ‘fess up to your editors and get yourself off the story. Nothing gray about it.”
So does media critic Mark Jacobs: “This is not a gray area in journalism. Reporters are supposed to avoid and disclose conflicts of interest.”
Sadly, the Olivia Nuzzi/ RFK Jr. scandal is part of a much larger media failure that ramped up when Trump first went down that golden escalator some nine years ago. Since then, journalism standards have been warped beyond recognition. I actually thought the pitiful news coverage of the Republican National Convention last July was the low point, but I was wrong. Political reporting has continued to get worse. Some of the recent low-lights include:
Sane-washing Trump’s gibberish to make him sound more normal
Minimizing JD Vance’s bigotry and racism in exchange for reporter access to the candidate
Describing Trump’s promise to forcibly round-up and deport thousands of migrants as a legitimate affordable housing plan
Failing to protest when Trump shut off media microphones during a press conference
Offering no pushback when Trump lies instead of answering reporter questions
Changed long-standing fact-checking practices to only refer to what Trump says at any given moment instead of comparing his statements to contradictory past ones and enacted policies
Ignoring Trump’s cognitive decline after crusading against Biden on the very same topic
Making themselves more important than the subjects they cover by constantly harping on whether a candidate has met a bogus sit-down interview standard.
Writing headlines that mimic Trump’s talking points
I’ve grown tired of the oft-repeated claim that “reporters haven’t figured out how to cover Trump.” I’m sorry, but it should not take nearly a decade to decide that lies should be called lies; that false equivalence is a political strategy not a legitimate journalism construct; that news headlines should do more than repeat a candidate’s often-false claims; that romantic relationships with your sources are verboten and that facts matter.
But as the list above shows, political reporters are willingly making more cracks in the journalism foundation every single day. Can it be repaired? Can journalists rebuild trust with news consumers? Maybe a good place to start is a general agreement that conflict of interest is a serious issue.
Jennifer Schulze is a Chicago journalist reporting on journalism. Follow Jennifer on Threads @newsjennifer_schulze or Twitter/X @NewsJennifer.