The United Flight: What You Need to Know
by Melina Joseph
Journalists dig up criminal record of United passenger — is a victim’s background newsworthy?
Last Sunday, 69-year-old physician David Dao was forcefully removed from a United Airlines flight after refusing to give up his seat. Videos showed the man, bloodied and screaming, dragged down the aisle. The incident made headlines, with the international community expressing both sympathy and outrage.
Dao suffered a concussion, a broken nose and the loss of two teeth. United issued an apology statement for what they described as a “horrible situation.”
However, reporters were swift in publicizing records of the Vietnamese father of five.
“United Airlines Dr. David Dao convicted of exchanging drugs for sex,” reported TMZ last Tuesday.
Courier-Journal had tweeted, “David Dao, the Elizabethtown doctor yanked from the United flight, has a troubled past in Kentucky.”
“Doctor dragged off United flight was felon who traded prescription drugs for secret gay sex with patient half his age and took them himself — and he needed anger management, was ‘not forthright’ and had control issues, psychiatrist found,” wrote the Daily Mail.
At one point in time, there were allegations that the media had misidentified the United Airlines passenger. The real identity of the individual was averred to be Dr. David Thanh Duc Dao, based in Louisiana, rather than the originally named Dr. David Anh Duc Dao of Kentucky.
Journalists were accused of sloppy reporting and smearing Dao with a wrong criminal record.
This misidentification claim turned out to be false, as confirmed by a receptionist at the Elizabethtown office where Dao’s wife works. She spoke with The Los Angeles Times, asserting that the Dao on the plane was the same one based in Kentucky.
As it turns out, Dao was convicted of six felonies in 2004. According to state medical licensing records, he was sexually involved with a patient and had illegally prescribed drugs. Forced to give up his medical license, he was given approval to resume restricted practice in 2015.
Many found the reporting of his criminal history to be unnecessary and victim-blaming. Combined with the misconception that the “wrong Dao” had been identified, further criticism ensued.
“It doesn’t matter what David Dao did or didn’t do in his past, because none of it is relevant to whether or not he should have been left in hospital after boarding a flight home,” argued Holly Baxter of The Independent.
Others have echoed similar sentiments, expressing concerns over focusing on Dao’s background rather than the incident at hand.
“Shame on you for attacking the passenger instead of United,” commented one person on an article by The Washington Times.
Such controversy brings forth a very relevant question: Is it ethical of journalists to delve into the backstories of victims? In cases such as Dao’s, doing so is seen as justifying actions of the perpetrator.
Some individuals said that the reports of Dao’s background reminded them of cases in which a rape victim’s history was dredged up in efforts to be used against them.
A common defense for researching and publishing records of victims is to better understand the context of a situation.
Last week, which was also known as Holy Week for Christians, Alexandra Petri of The Washington Post wrote a satirical article in response to the publishing of Dao’s criminal record:
“The gentleman arrested Thursday and tried before Pontius Pilate had a troubled background.
Born (possibly out of wedlock?) in a stable, this jobless thirty-something of Middle Eastern origin had had previous run-ins with local authorities for disturbing the peace, and had become increasingly associated with the members of a fringe religious group. He spent the majority of his time in the company of sex workers and criminals.”
Her piece ended with “But after all, he was no angel,” mimicking a story by The New York Times that referred to Michael Brown with the same phrase and received backlash for its sensationalism.
Numerous journalism experts have criticized the decision to publish past information regarding Dao.
Former NPR ombudsman Alicia Shepard said that Dao’s personal life, troubles, and work history were of no news value. “That is one of the clearest invasions of privacy I’ve heard about in a long time,” she affirmed.
Joel Christopher, executive editor of the Courier-Journal, defended the local newspaper’s article on Dao.
“This is an individual, who because of his past case, is known to people in the area,” he originally said to Buzzfeed. “Referring to him without referring to his past would be highly unusual.”
Others will have to decide whether a victim’s past is relevant, or instead undermines the incident at hand.
There are now rising concerns that Dao’s past may play a role in further investigation. Oscar Munoz, chief executive officer of United Airlines, referred to Dao in a letter as “disruptive and belligerent.”
