While touring the Newseum’s “Assassination of JFK and Kennedy Family History” exhibit, I observed the former president’s legacy from a journalistic perspective. The exhibit featured recollections from historians, journalists, newspaper headlines and photographs from the Kennedy era.
I was most affected by the telegraph released following Kennedy’s assassination that confirmed his untimely death. Although it was before my lifetime, the artifact evoked a raw sadness in me. In my future public relations career, would I ever have to send something out that is so difficult to write?
I tried to imagine what it must have felt like to be a reporter at this time. What was the ethical line between informing the public of how the president was murdered while respecting the privacy of the mourning family, I wondered. I concluded that a public relation representative’s tactical decisions span much further than editing.
50 Years of Grey
CBS Evening News Correspondent Walter Cronkite left America with a resonating thought the night of the assassination.
“In the search of our conscience we find a new dedication to the American concepts…maybe it may yet be possible to say that JFK did not die in vain,” Cronkite said.
For public relations specialists, theoretical knowledge is not always the right answer; question of decorum cannot always be answered with AP style. Notably, this quote was from Nov. 25, 1963. Half a decade later, a grey area remains in how journalists responded to the assassination. Somehow, Cronkite found a positive message in the madness.
This trip taught me that in the future, the hybrid of skill and sensitivity might be the most valuable tool in my career. When there is no clear answer, is there a balance where public relations can remain honest, reflective and sensitive to its audience?
Let me know what you think! Comment below or tweet to me @jamiegell