Vero Communiqué is proud to announce the renewal of its Platinum Seal of Transparency, for 2022, the highest level of recognition offered by GuideStar, a service of Candid.
The Platinum Seal of Transparency indicates that Vero Communiqué shares clear and important information with the public about its goals, strategies, capabilities, achievements, and progress indicators that showcase the progress and results its making toward its’ mission!
Previously known as the GuideStar Platinum Seal of Transparency, in 2019, Foundation Center and GuideStar joined forces to become Candid. To earn Platinum status, Vero Communiqué provided extensive information through its Candid Nonprofit Profile. The in-depth data encompasses Vero Communiqué s organizational background, in-depth financial data, and qualitative and quantitative information about its goals, strategies, capabilities, and results.
Philanthropists, donors, and foundations who support charitable organizations rely upon the Candid rating as a verified indicator of the strength, proficiency, and effectiveness of nonprofits.
One thought on “Vero Communiqué Announces Renewal of its Platinum Seal of Transparancy.”
I understand you subscribe to a journalists’ code of ethics that includes:
“Seek Truth and Report It”
This is an admirable goal. Unfortunately, undermined by what follows… the ethical code continues:
“Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair. Journalists should be honest and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.”
This is an accurate statement of advocacy journalism, the scourge of modern journalism… where reporters no longer seek to report truth to the reader, but they are determined to “interpret information” for readers… sometimes entailing information the journalist doesn’t understand or have sufficient background of knowledge to accurately “interpret.”
Quite frankly, advocacy journalism is difficult to distinguish from rank propaganda.
This is dangerous for the following reasons:
1. It presumes the reader incapable of making their own interpretation from objective facts.
2. It presumes the journalist has an obligation to “interpret” information (i.e., see that the information conforms to his biases) rather than present information for the reader to interpret based on their own knowledge.
If there were questions about the information provided objectively, serious readers can pursue other avenues that would lead to their own interpretation. Relying on reporter bias confuses facts with opinions.