Washington And The Ombudsman Analysis

Last year the opinion post by the ombudsman of the Washington Post about the Post being ‘pro-gay’ have raised many voices. In his writing he has discussed and talked by the evidence of an email conversation between a reader, the ombudsman; Patrick and a reporter of the Post. The reader claims that the Post only caters to a special class of the Washington and wants appreciation from them. The main issue the reader had was that the Post is very much Pro-gay and gives a lot of exposure to the gay couples and gay stories, which is not very comfortable for the conservative people of the society. He claimed that highlighting these things is kind of encouraging it which is not acceptable for people like him. On the contrary the reporter claims that
It is an eye opener for the people not a brainwash. The role of a journalist is not to defend his point if a reader disagrees with it or feels offended. You are in particular catering a variety of people with different opinions, feelings and believe, and you are not by any form bound to make everyone happy or satisfy them by your writings. Many will like your posts, and many will think it was a total trash. If anyone feels offended by any of your comments or remarks, they have every right to say it. After all, you have the right to say what you want in your articles. But ethical you are bound to respond back in a positive way and accept criticism on your part as well. When you are talking about ‘gay’, it is a controversial topic ever since its beginning and talking more about it is your right, but you should expect such a thing coming up. It is just one reader who gathered up the courage and asked about it; many such readers would have thought about it but didn’t bother putting it up to the Posts management.
Washington post caters a massive audience and it a representation of their ideologies. It should have been clearly defined in its policies and that how much and how openly these kinds of topics can be discussed and talked about and what needs to be done to handle labels such as ‘pro- gay’ being tagged to it. This is about the overall repute and image of the paper; it’s not just about the reporter or one reader. It is definitely necessary to talk about such issues considering the voice of many of our society. (PAREENE,