A discerning reader, a sergeant first class in the Army, has written the ombudsman about a story that appeared in Stars and Stripes' Mideast and Europe editions of July 15. He argues that the story, picked up via a wire service from the Miami Herald, was unbalanced when compared to a more detailed story from The Associated Press. The published story, about a reservist in Florida who is fighting his fifth deployment to the war zones, presumably will have been of considerable interest to service members.

For that reason, I include below the sergeant's e-mail to me and my response. The Stars and Stripes page that featured the story in question can be viewed here. 

Mr. Mazzarella,

On Sunday July 15th, 2007 on page six of the Middle East edition of the "Stars and Stripes" a Miami Herald article titled "Reservist fights fifth war deployment" was published. I question the fairness and balance of this article for the following reasons:

1. The total duration of his previous deployments is not listed in this story as it is in the Associated Press story on the same topic. His total previous deployment total is ten non-consecutive months with his last absence over three years ago. I feel the story as presented misleads the reader into assuming his previous four deployments were considerably longer...

2. The article states that his job at Sikorsky may be in jeopardy, but it does not list a reason as to why or mention that US Law has protection for deployed reservist from suffering repercussions in their civilian employment.

3. The article states that he could lose his home, but provided no reason as to why this may occur.

4. The article states that his professors say he will suffer a setback if deployed, but does not state what this setback will be.

Sir, the article as presented appears to me to be lacking significant facts, preventing a reader from forming an unbiased opinion.

Very respectfully,
Sergeant First Class Ryan V. Goldsmith

Sgt. Goldsmith is correct on several counts, including the most important one: The story as published did not contain the information about how long the soldier had spent downrange in his previous deployments. One of these was for 15 days and the total of the deployments was 10 months. The published story also did not include comments from the Army spokesperson, apparently cut from the original Miami Herald story for space reasons.

I also agree with Sgt. Goldsmith's complaint that the story does not say why Sgt. Botta might lose his job at Sikorsky, given that there are laws that forbid disciplining of deployed reservists.

The other complaints are open to question -- that the reservist could lose his home and that he could suffer a setback in his college career if he is deployed again. It stands to reason that interruption in college course work could be difficult, and his economic situation may well be tenuous where household finances are concerned.

In sum, though, the readership would have been better served if the AP story, not that of the Miami Herald, had been used.