Download PDF - International Center for Journalists

Case Studies: Freedom and Responsibility
forever changing the lives of
youngsters who had no idea of their
real origin? Or should he protect the
identities of the victims, allowing the
sins of their adoptive parents to go
unrevealed and unpunished?
Campos Rivas worked for the
magazine Hablemos (Let’s Talk), a
publication of the newspaper El Diario
de Hoy. He had all the facts he
needed, supplied by a Catholic priest
who directed an organization that
sought to reunite children snatched
during the war with their biological
families. The priest’s organization had
documented thousands of orphaned
children who were given false papers
so they could be adopted abroad, and
many others who were adopted by
military leaders who never told the
children where they came from.
Campos Rivas and his editors
wrestled with the dilemma. For all they
knew, the children were living happy
lives with their adoptive parents. To
reveal their origins would undoubtedly
roil the families and could even lead to
disastrous consequences. But to not
publish the story—or to publish it
without names—would mean that the
military leaders probably would never
be punished for their crimes. And
didn’t the children have a right to know
their true identities? Didn’t their
biological families have a right to know
what happened to them? Another
consideration was that, as any
journalist knows, a story like this
would lose much of its impact if it did
not show the faces and tell the stories
of the children affected.
Campos Rivas’ source, the Catholic
priest, wanted him to do the story but
without naming names. The priest’s
organization could go on quietly
informing the adopted children of their
true origins. In the end, the
newspaper’s editor, Yolanda Menjicar,
decided to do as the priest requested,
“in the spirit of national reconciliation.”
But the journalist himself still isn’t sure
that was the right decision.
“I still feel the same dilemma,”
Campos Rivas said five years after
the story ran. “Sometimes I think
publishing the names would have
helped bring about re-encounters (of
wrongly adopted children with their
biological families). Or maybe it would
have opened social wounds and done
great damage.”
The priest’s organization continues
working to reunite the young men and
women, in El Salvador and abroad,
with their birth families.
Questions for Discussion
1. Should Campos Rivas have
published the story? Should he
have named the military leaders
who adopted the children? Should
he have named the children?
2. Should Campos Rivas have tried
to interview the military leaders?
Should he have tried to interview
the children? Does it matter how
old the children were? How old
would they have to be before you
would think it was acceptable to
interview them?
3. List all of the “stakeholders” in this
case – that is, the people who
would be affected by the decisions
Campos Rivas and his colleagues
made. What are the
consequences of publication
45