news-record.com

Year ago, we instituted paid obituaries, as most papers have done. The idea of letting relatives have a final say about their loved ones was persuasive, as was the additional revenue. Before, when the obits were free, we had a standard form and length and all the obits pretty much sounded the same. Now obituaries are handled by our advertising department.

Today we published a paid obituary of Mary Ann Holder, who by most accounts was a fine, loving mother until last Sunday when something happened and she shot and killed five people and then killed herself. The obituary doesn't include any information about the homicides. (The paid obituary isn't online in the same form as it is in the paper.)

The paid obituary isn't a news story. On the news pages, we have certainly written a great deal about the shootings. Today, the same day the obituary ran, we wrote a front page news story about what the paid obit said and the scheduled funeral services.

Is the omission of the shootings an issue? I can imagine readers scratching their heads. It isn't uncommon for paid obits to omit newsworthy information. What may have brought this issue up is that the obits of the shooter and her victims were all published together.

Our policy — and, I think, the policy of most papers — is that the paid announcement of a person's death should include pretty much what the family wishes. We don't fact-check obits unless there is something glaring, and our experience is that most obituaries are an accurate biographical recounting of the achievements and positive accomplishments of a person's life. Meanwhile, if the person is newsworthy for some reason — positive or negative — the news department will write about the person's life and include anything that's relevant. But I hate it when we leave readers scratching their heads, so I'm not sure our policies are exactly right.

Thoughts?