Scare stories, numbers presented out of context, worst-case speculation. It’s not your job to make readers feel safe. But it’s not your job to scare them, either.

By Alexander Russo

Last week, US News published a story headlined 1,000 Kids in Mississippi Test Positive for COVID-19 After School Reopens, calling what was happening in Mississippi “a grim bellwether” for what could happen in other states when their schools reopen for in-person instruction while the Delta variant rages.

Well, maybe. Anything’s possible. But the US News piece depicts an alarming, highly regional outcome as if it’s relevant nationally and fails to give readers enough context about the numbers it presents. What‘s happening in Mississippi or any of a handful of other low-vaccination, low-mask states is not what’s happening nationally – not so far, at least. Only about a third of school districts were open as of last week. And what’s happened in Mississippi seems unlikely to happen in many other parts of the country.

This is not at all the only example of flawed back-to-school coverage that I’ve seen so far at the start of 2021-22. The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, and other outlets have all produced flawed stories that I’d argue misinform and mislead readers.

And, as anyone who’s followed school COVID coverage over the past year will tell you, this a familiar problem. Last year’s back-to-school coverage also featured grabby headlines about outbreaks and quarantines that were predominantly taking place in places where protective measures weren’t in place or enforced. Cases and infections were presented as if they were hospitalizations; risks were presented in a vacuum. Worst-case scenarios got the most attention. Too much of the coverage focused on perceptions and predictions. The coverage didn’t get much more nuanced as the year went on.

However, there are lots of ways to avoid repeating the problems from last year’s back-to-school coverage while still producing helpful, compelling stories for readers. Some suggestions include giving readers more context, making sure to feature a representative mix of anecdotes, and focusing on facts rather than feelings and speculation.

Times like now, “it’s important for news organizations to come hard with facts,” Poynter’s Tom Jones wrote recently. “Numbers, not opinions. Science, not guesses.”

Previously from The Grade: Covering the 2020-2021 school reopening debate.

GIVE CONTEXT OVER RAW NUMBERS

One key coverage correction is to avoid presenting the most frightening information in the most negative light, terrifying parents and teachers as much as informing them – especially when it comes to presenting readers with raw numbers.

When raw numbers of cases, quarantines, and outbreaks dominate your story, bad things often happen.

It’s a concern that some media outlets have acknowledged when it comes to COVID reporting lately.

“Don’t just list the number of cases or hospitalizations or deaths,” advised Poynter’s Jones. “Give audiences the details and be sure to put them in proper context.”

One key bit of context that’s too often missing from COVID school stories? Whether the cases have anything to do with kids and adults being in school Just because the infection is detected through a school-based program doesn’t mean that school was the transmission site.

“First-day cases aren’t from schools,” reminds Anthony LaMesa, an education policy researcher who watches school COVID coverage closely. Follow the research closely and you’ll see that in-school transmission isn’t as much of an issue as it’s often presented.

Related from The Grade: Smart ways to report on COVID cases detected in schools, The wrong way to write about K-12 COVID-19 cases.

MIXED RESULTS AND SUCCESS STORIES ARE FAIR GAME, TOO

While failures and conflicts get covered thoroughly, this year’s back-to-school coverage should also include mixed outcomes and successes that are taking place all around us.

What school or district is having a typical reopening experience, neither worst nor best? What school or district is having a better-than-average reopening experience?

One good place to start might be a new series from data journalist Betsy Ladyzhets, who is profiling five schools that kept their communities safe last year. These schools all brought the majority of their students back in person — without causing COVID-19 outbreaks in their communities. What did they do? How is it going so far this year?

It’s easy to focus on the places where reopening is going particularly badly, but that’s not necessarily representative of what is happening. The success of in-person instruction was woefully under-told last year. At the very least, try to mix it up so you’re not covering outbreaks and ignoring everything else.

Related from The Grade: The tentative successes of in-person learning deserve more coverage.

PAY ATTENTION TO VACCINE UPTAKE, TESTING, & MANDATES

Others might disagree, but vaccination and testing programs are the most important and poorly covered aspects of this year’s reopening effort. Only a handful of states and districts have adopted vaccine mandates. And only ten districts out of CRPE’s 100 largest districts have employed mandatory COVID testing for students and/or staff. A quarter of states have banned vaccine mandates for public employees.

What are the percentages for school staff who’ve been vaccinated, locally or nationally? Where are the public employee mandates being rolled out — and where are educators being exempted? What are the comparative benefits of mandating vaccinations versus testing?

The details vary, but teachers in California and Hawaii are going to have to get vaccinated or tested. Ditto for teachers in Chicago and New York City, among other places. Why are so many other states and districts not following suit, given the efficacy of the vaccines and the need to get kids back in schools without endangering their families?

These are tough, obvious questions that a reporter should be asking, nationally and locally. (Ditto for asking questions about districts without remote options for parents, though most of the largest ones are already planning to offer them.)

FEELINGS AREN’T FACTS. (NEITHER IS SPECULATION.)

Have you noticed how many stories you’re seeing that focus on how people feel about what’s going on? As I noted in last week’s newsletter, there are lots of stories with this focus:  ‘I’m terrified’: COVID adds to first-day jitters as districts make last-minute safety adjustments (Houston Chronicle), ‘We’re back to panicking’: Moms are hit hardest with camps and day cares closing again (WaPo), ‘Terrified’ Houston-area parents brace for return of school, as delta throws wrench into COVID plans (Houston Chronicle). They’re everywhere.

In my personal life, I’m all about feelings. But as a journalist, I’m wary of making them the center of the coverage (and, in particular, loathe when they’re featured in headlines). Feelings are so heated right now that focusing on them pulls attention toward the extremes. If the feelings aren’t accurate, it puts a burden on reporters to contextualize them, something that doesn’t happen nearly as often as it should.

I’d much rather have already-overstretched education reporters asking hard questions and digging up concrete information.

BEWARE OF THE OUTRAGE/PANIC STORY

Most important of all, try to avoid unnecessarily amplifying risks and fears with your back-to-school coverage.

Just this past Sunday, the New York Times’ front-page story highlighted a scattered string of school-based outbreaks and political disputes and presented them to readers as if they were numerous and widespread – or would be soon.

“What was supposed to be a new, relatively normal year has become a politicized, bewildering experience for many parents, students and educators,” according to the Times. What’s happening in one place — Cobb Country, Georgia – is presented to readers as a possible glimpse of “what’s to come.”

But that’s not quite right. A third of kids are back in school. But just “a handful” of districts are pushing back start states and individual schools or grades are going virtual due to quarantining, according to the weekly Burbio tracker.

It’s not your job to make readers feel safe. But it’s not your job to scare them, either.

Related from The Grade: How to avoid writing needlessly alarmist school reopening stories.]

At its worst, the back-to-school coverage has been irresponsible and toxic. CNN and a bunch of other outlets reported on four educators dying in the span of 24 hours, a tragedy despite the fact that it turned out none of them had been in school buildings and most of them were unvaccinated. The Washington Post ran a story about how more than 10,000 students and teachers across 14 states are quarantined for coronavirus exposure, downplaying the tiny percentage of people this represents and the likelihood that the infections occurred in the community rather than at school.

But there’s also been some informative and balanced back-to-school coverage: The WSJ’s national roundup makes clear that the main problems with outbreaks are taking place in the South and West. The Washington Post conveyed an appropriate mix of Hopes and fears as schools open their doors for new year. This US News article gives a helpful overview of where things stood in terms of vaccine and testing mandates as of a few days ago. A recent WRAL piece about teacher vaccinations found that “not only is the shot optional for teachers in NC… most districts aren’t keeping data on teacher vaccination rates at all.” The New York Times reported last week that the vast majority of the largest school districts in the nation don’t require vaccination or frequent testing from school staff.

So, it can be done – and should be. There’s room for so much more variety and depth as this story unfolds.

Previously from The Grade

How to avoid writing needlessly alarmist school reopening stories
The tentative successes of in-person learning deserve more coverage
Negative COVID coverage and prolonged school shutdowns

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Alexander Russo

Alexander Russo

Alexander Russo is founder and editor of The Grade, an award-winning effort to help improve media coverage of education issues. He’s also a Spencer Education Journalism Fellowship winner and a book author. You can reach him at @alexanderrusso.

Visit their website at: https://the-grade.org/