1. Specifically in the case of Chris Fowler, I cannot say with confidence that I wouldn’t have made this same mistake. When you find information about an athlete from what seems to be a credible source, it is easy to believe that this information is true. It is not like Fowler was trying to seek out scandalous information about this athlete but rather was just looking for some hard-nose, basic facts. However, after class discussion, if I were to have been Fowler in this scenario I would make sure to check my sources. In doing this I would solidify that A. my sources are credible and B. That this information is backed up by at least three other sources.
In the case of the faulty twitter interview, I would have made sure to do the interview anywhere but Twitter, preferably by phone or in person. Gaining your sources from twitter is risky but at times could be the only route to take. However, a full on interview should have not been conducted via twitter, rather gain the contact information via twitter and follow that up with a phone or in-person interview.
2. In the case of Fowler my decision was reached through both are class discussion and the belief that you should always back your sources up. When you are going to announce something as fact, like Fowler attempted to do, you should-at minimum-find that same pool of information on three other sources. Furthermore, if you on in the high-paying and high-profile position Fowler was in then this information could have easily been confirmed by way of a quick phone call.
In the case of the twitter interview, my decision was reached by the basic journalistic standard of not ever doing interviews over social media, let alone twitter where you can only supply answer in 140 characters or less. At bare minimum, this interview should have been conducted via e-mail. However, in the case of finding your source on twitter it would be important to do the interview as a phone call at least, preferable in person in order to solidify that the person is indeed who they claim to be.
3. For both Fowler and the twitter interview, I decided this way because it simply would have stopped the situation from happening. Had Fowler checked
his sources and confirmed the facts about the tennis player than he would have said the correct information on air. Had the author of the Huffington Post article done this interview over phone or in person it would have been much easier to detect the lies the interviewee was feeding the reporter. Had the interview been done in person the problem would have been obvious, over phone not as obvious but still detectable.