The very reason I have chosen my life path to be a journalist is this – I want to deliver what is unshared, under-reported stories of people categorized as a social minority. This sentence kind of becomes my own cliche words in my LinkedIn’s profile, resume, cover letters, scholarship essays and etc.

I am yet a professional journalist. My reporting, most of the times, needs an extensive amount of corrections before being published. I always struggle to come up with a both concise and precise sentence when writing an article. I have to speak extra-slow when conducting phone interviews with sources in order for them to understand my non-native English accent.

These are only a few drawbacks I have as a reporter. There are far more I can assure you. Then why I am revealing my weaknesses to you through my blog post? It is because what I will address from here below would either make you disagree or think why a student reporter, who yet is professional, is writing with such a controversial topic.

It was March 7 when I began to find single homeless women to hear their stories. It was part of my this week reporting that tried to tell how the city of Columbia’s(Missouri) alleged negligence on single homeless women affects those women’s lives.

Finding a homeless woman with a compelling story was not an impossible mission. What seemed to be much harder was to lead, or persuade, her to share the story with me. After being ditched three times with three homeless women, I was finally able to meet with a homeless woman.

I met her through a third person, who has been supporting her on a daily basis. She told that third person that she would meet me at the Splasher’s Laundry and Tanning at this time. That was it. That was what I all had. Though nothing could guarantee that she would show up there, I put my reporting gears on my shoulder and took a 2.5 miles road trip to the laundry place.

Praising the Lord! I met her after the several experiences of being ditched by homeless women.

This woman has been a homeless for three years, after her parents’ death and experiencing an unfortunate accident both in 2012. Because of her personal security’s concern, she first didn’t want to even talk to a reporter, like myself.

As a reporter, it is always tempting to write a very compelling story. At the same time, I, however, never want to place my source in danger because of my reporting. She was very concerned of what she shared with me. Her car, which is what basically she is dwelling in everyday, has several dents and scratches. She told me they are all from one man who has been following back and harrassing her.

This is why she didn’t initially want to be inteviewed. I fully understood her situation and promised her that I would not use any information that she feels discomfortable of me using it.

The agreement was not to use her full name and whatever she says not to use during the accuracy check.

Here, I did something wrong, according to the common journalism rule – reporters are not allowed to make any compromises with the sources without editors’ consents.

Here, I am dare to dissent the common rule. It is true that reporters should respect and try to obey what their editors advise them to do as much as they can. Yes, I agree. However, in a situation when a reporter tries to talk with a person in a very sensitive situation, it is totally a different story.

Reporters surely have duties to deliver as much information as possible to their readers; however, at the same time, I believe we, reporters, have another duty to maintain the ethical boundary with our sources. We, reporters, should not, must not, outght not to lead our sources in danger for our own benefits.

I had a very similar situation last year November, when I was reporting what MU Asian students are undergoing with under-reported racism/discmination on campus.

Out of 80-100 Asian students I had spoken, there were about 10 to 15 stories that were really compelling and I was tempted to reveal them so that MU officials would her these stories and take them into consideration when crafting a new diversity/inclusion policy. However, I could not do so. I was not ethical. Without their consents, I could not use their stories.

Those four Asian students I was able to have their stories on the paper. It took me more than a month to persuade all of them to share their stories.

One guy named Ken Han had a very compelling story. However, he was, at that time, in a legal process with someone, who spoke a racial slur at him. Han never wanted to be interviewed. However, I needed his story. The agreement was I would not use his real name, instead use his nickname. My Missourian editor, at that time, wanted to reveal his nationality and full name. I said no. I said no it is not ethical.

My editor and I ended up only using his nickname, the story was published, and I have not heard any concerns from Han after the story was published.

Yes, delivering “THE” stories is our, reporters’, duties. But, at the same time, it is also our duty not to cross over a certain ethical line with our sources.