NEW YORK (AP) — Nine days after The New York Times reported on the political symbolism of an upside-down American flag flying at the home of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, the Washington Post acknowledged reporting the same story more than three years ago told and decided not to publish it.
The Post’s story was both an extraordinary example of journalistic introspection and an illustration of how coverage of the Supreme Court has changed since the incident itself, shortly after the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
That day, some protesters marching in support of former President Donald Trump carried the upside-down flag. Both newspapers reported that the same symbol was displayed outside Alito’s home in Fairfax County, Virginia, before President Joe Biden’s inauguration.
Alito has said that his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, raised the flag as part of a dispute with neighbors who had posted “personally offensive” yard signs toward them. Judges traditionally avoid party political symbols to maintain the appearance of neutrality in political disputes that may come before them.
For journalists, it raises a question: Should a civil servant’s family be held to the same standards as that civil servant himself?
‘A SURPRISING ADMISSION’ FROM THE POST
The Times said in its story published May 16 that it had “recently” obtained photos of the flag that few had outside Alito’s home. The Post said in its own story Saturday that it had been told about the story in January 2021 and investigated it, choosing not to write about it because it appeared Alito’s wife was responsible and that it was not clear that the neighborhood dispute over went politics.
“It was a surprising admission from such a major news organization,” said Jesse Holland, associate dean of the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University, and a former journalist who covered the Supreme Court for five years. “Very, very rarely do you have a major news organization saying they probably would have made a different decision.”
Nowhere in the story, however, does the Post say its decision more than three years ago was wrong, and a spokesperson declined to elaborate further Tuesday.
Kathleen Culver, director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin, said this was a bad decision. And, she added, if she had been at the Post, she would have advocated for the paper to be better known.
While Martha-Ann Alito is entitled to her own opinion, such a flag should not be displayed outside the home of a U.S. Supreme Court justice, Culver said. “It is a flag that violates the neutrality that the Supreme Court is supposed to respect,” she said.
When a now-retired Post reporter visited the Alito home in January 2021, after the flag was removed, Martha-Ann Alito pointed out that an upside-down flag had long been interpreted as a symbol of distress, the newspaper said.
A FORMER SENIOR EDITOR SAYS IT WAS HIS CALL
The publication Semafor reported that Cameron Barr, then editor-in-chief of the Post, said he took responsibility for the decision. He said he suggested the newspaper write about the neighborhood dispute, using the flag as one element. But that didn’t happen, and Barr expressed regret that he hadn’t pushed for it harder. Barr left the Post in 2023.
Holland, reporting from the Supreme Court on behalf of The Associated Press, said he sympathized with the decision that the action of a government official’s wife was not news.
“One of the things we try not to do is judge someone for the actions of their partner,” he said. “And if this was the action of Sam Alito’s wife, should we hold him responsible for something his wife did?”
A veteran court reporter might have concluded that writing it wasn’t worth alienating someone so important on the beat, he said. Yet Martha-Ann Alito has now drawn attention for opinions related to the 2020 election, in much the same way as Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, Ginny Thomas. Both men are in a position to help decide matters related to the aftermath of the election.
Martha-Ann Alito should be aware of the fact that she shares a home with a Supreme Court justice, Culver said. The flag display, even though she was responsible, is still a story.
The Post’s decision reflects the long-standing view among some media organizations that the Supreme Court should be spotlighted through the decisions it makes, rather than as a political institution, she said.
The Post’s initial decision came before the unprecedented leak of a draft decision that struck down women’s right to abortion, she said. ProPublica also won a Pulitzer Prize for public service earlier this month for its reporting that showed how billionaires gave expensive gifts to Supreme Court justices and paid for their travel.
“It is long past due,” she said, “for journalists to put aside their respect for the court.”
___
David Bauder writes about media for The Associated Press. Follow him up http://twitter.com/dbauder.
