By Katherine Burgess
Managing Editor
By now we have all seen the headlines: A football star’s girlfriend, who died a few days before he took his team to victory, never existed at all.
As a journalism major, I find one of the oddest parts of this bizarre saga to be the fact that major media outlets reported the death of someone who never existed. They failed to fact-check those reports.
While this story has left others disappointed with Manti Te’o, Notre Dame linebacker, and with the alleged trickster, I am disappointed with the media.
I am also disappointed with the passivity of the audience who absorbed the story, failing to critically examine and call out inconsistent “facts.”
In September 2012, newspaper after newspaper told the sensational story of how Te’o, who suffered the deaths of both his grandmother and his girlfriend, rose above the heartbreak and emerged triumphant.
Eventually it was discovered that Lennay Kekua, Te’o’s girlfriend, was not a real person and certainly did not die of leukemia.
Some believe that Te’o was hoaxed by an elaborate fraud, perpetuated through the phone and Twitter.
Some believe that he knew about the deception and merely wanted publicity.
One thing is painfully clear: The media leaped at the sob story of a heartbroken football player and reported Kekua’s death without confirmation. Then the public ate up the story.
Errors sometimes make it into the news, but rarely does the fake death of a fake person make it onto multiple mainstream news outlets.
“ESPN,” “The New York Post,” “CBS Sports,” “The South Bend Tribune,” “Sports Illustrated” and more reported that Lennay Kekua had died.
Some even described Te’o’s meeting with Kekua, along with other unverified details of their relationship. None, apparently, bothered to call the hospital to confirm her death.
Any of these reporters could have attempted to check records, obituaries or funeral announcements for Kekua’s death.
Had they done so, the hoax would have been uncovered far earlier, before the media circulated the tear-jerking tale of Te’o’s dead girlfriend.
The stories even gave different days for Kekua’s death.
“The New York Post” said that Kekua and Te’o’s grandmother, who actually did pass away, had died three days apart; “CBS Sports” said four days; “Sports Illustrated” said they died within a 24-hour period.
One would hope that a reporter, noticing that his or her story disagreed with another story on the same subject, would have clear motivation to call a hospital to confirm the exact date of death.
One would also hope that a reader, noticing that “The New York Post”and “CBS Sports” disagreed, would have called the news sources to protest.
While many view the situation as a cautionary tale that warns about online relationships, I view it as a warning for journalists to do the work necessary to verify their stories. It also is a tale that warns readers to be critical and to call out the media on inconsistencies.
Taking the extra step to double-check details of a story is a crucial part of journalism, but watching for inconsistencies and fishy “facts” is an important part of media consumption as well.
Reporters must seek out solid support for their facts.
Only then will nonexistent people cease making it into newspaper headlines.
Katherine Burgess is a sophomore journalism major.
