There is no line

Would you blog a 3-year-old's funeral? What would motivate you to do something like that in live time? Why would you do it? Would you ask yourself ethical questions? Would you have pause? Would you care? Would you dare? What if you were a reporter for a professional newspaper and Twittered the 3-year-old's funeral anyway?

Then you would be Berny Morson, a reporter for the Rocky Mountain News. And you'd be wrong for doing what you did.

Marten Kudlis, the toddler who was in the wrong Basking Robbins at the wrong time, was killed as a result of an SUV hitting a Mazda truck, then the pickup hitting a utility box, then the utility box horrifically and tragically ending the 3-year-old's life (the CBS-Denver story says the toddler was 2, but all other news outlets found say the child was 3). Two others, both of whom were in the pickup, were killed as well.

Of course, to put things in perspective, since it is easy to get extremely emotional whenever someone leaves us too soon, the brunt of the real anger ought to be aimed at the alleged hit-and-run driver, Francis Hernandez, who is 23. The driver, thought to be Hernandez, fled the scene on foot but was arrested, according to police.

Funerals are usually reported in an appropriate, sensitive way. And publication occurs after the funeral is completed. That standard was not followed and outrage ensued. How desperate do you have to be for a story to blog LIVE via text messaging from a 3-year-old's funeral?

But not all viewed Morson's texting in a negative light.

"The technology is there to offer people the opportunity to keep people bang up to date with developments, whether that be the minutiae of live [sic] or something more serious," Tech.Blorge's Dave Parrack said. "All Morson was doing was utilizing the technology in the way it was ultimately intended."

Yes, Dave: Technology was ultimately intended to carelessly text/blog live at the place where a 3-year-old's family is devastated, where the realization sets in that life will never be the same, where sobs of crying reverberate, where cheeks are red and tears can be tasted. That type of circumstance epitomizes the environment in which technology ought to be used for instantaneous gratification.

See, with being plugged in 24/7, there needs to be more thought, more reason, more discretion. Ask: Am I being ethical? What if positions were reversed; would I be okay with what this reporter is doing?

If it's wrong in most cases to text from class and the movies (I have broken both of those codes of conduct many times over), then texting from a funeral is out-of-this world, insanely inappropriate. And selfish. The act shows a lack of compassion and very little trace of humanity.

Journalists have a very difficult job. They have to go to the event no matter what it is -- where the people can be as nice as ever or as hostile as an aggressive pack of wolves -- and do their duty. It's not easy to ask a coach why she put this player in the game instead of that player when her team lost by one. It's not easy to ask the one who is responsible for the budget where all the money went. It's not easy to put your microphone close to a relative of the deceased and ask what the departed meant to the world.

It's not easy to cover a funeral. Somebody has to do it. And technology and media are evolving. Different kinds of decisions must be made. Sometimes you don't know where the line is until it has been crossed.

But in the case of the death of the toddler at the ice scream store, the line was unquestionably crossed. Twitter can be a great addition to society, as it has around 2.9 million members and keeps individuals informed like never before. Great reporting has been done via Twitter. But enough is enough. Are we not sensitive enough to let the sanctity of someone's life be for just a little bit longer? Is there a way to report something so sad in a more appropriate medium?

Reporters ask themselves ethical questions all the time. With blogs and devices where anybody can be a "reporter" at any moment, there is less room in this world for privacy. But if you are a professional, you should know better. I cringe at the thought of doing what the Rocky Mountain News reporter did.

There needs to be a larger discussion in media of, quite frankly, doing what is right, having empathy, and being ethical. At 10:20 a.m. on Sept. 10, 2008, I would not have texted, "rabbi recites the main hebrew prayer of death" (and I would not have lowercased Rabbi or Hebrew). At 10:22 a.m. that same day I would not have texted, "earth being placed on coffin." I would not be able to live with myself.

In journalism nowadays, the speed of the delivery of information is more important than anything else, apparently. And in this case, I'm sure that the information provided was accurate. But would you want someone blogging your child's funeral? Some questions that need to be asked must do with the human condition. They must do with the heart.

Because if those ideals leave us when it matters the most, then what will be left of journalism?