The best ways for publishers to build credibility through transparency
I found this article to be beneficial in terms of being a writer and reader of journalism. I know most of us really wonder how truthful journalists can be and how much of what they say is truth and how much is simply propaganda. After looking at how different new sources can report on the same topic in such different ways in class, it really makes me question who can trust and who is actually being transparent. I enjoyed the link that this piece made by stating reporters job is to report the truth, therefor they themselves should also be truthful. I think it’s awful that people feel the need to twist facts to engage their audience, often altering the truth but it is so prominent in todays media. I think the best point made is to create credibility be as tranpsparent as possible. I think this is great advice because the more that is out there and openely known, the less there is to create false ideas about. I also thought the below list was helpful:
- Show the reporting and sources that support your work
- Collaborate with the audience
- Curate and attribute information responsibly
- Offer disclosures and statements of values
- Correct website and social media errors effectively
Do Times Journalists Pay Attention to Readers’ Comments?
I think that this is an interesting topic. It seems like today everyone has an opinion about absolutely everything and its no surprise to me that these reportes state that their stories often get hundreds of comments. I mean someone can post a single picture of a cat on facebook and get a million comments, so its only natural a story with real content get some. I find it refreshing to hear that journalists so high in their profession still take time to see what the readers are saying since its them they are writing for. I think its cool that these journalists in particular said that there comments help with follow up stories and help them at times gain sources. Maybe, its a bit of inspiration to comment more since those comments are being heard.
Do You Trust Rolling Stone?
After focussing pretty heavily on The Rolling Stones rape at UV story throughout this semester and finding so many errors in their reporting process for that story i find it slightly difficult to be able to sit down and read a story from them and take it as facts, although this is often hard to do when reading any news source completely. Honestly, everyone makes mistakes, but to me atleast, a mistake as big as the UV rape case is one that causes me to question the credibility of Rollings Stones entire writing/editorial process. Yes, the subject lied… a lot, but she was a young girl looking for fame. The writer, editors and fact checkers are professionals with a sole job of reporting truth. With so many holes in the story someone along the line should have said “hey, this doesnt add up” and the story should have been halted then and there, end of story. For them to go back and place blame on the subject is very dishonorable since it’s their job to check facts out. So while i strongly believe everyone does make mistakes, i feel like this one was a little too large to ignore and the company should look into enforcing more intense procedures for fact checking.
This article examines a pretty well known story of Williams being over seas reporting and being around close to the same time helicopters had been shot down. In reality he was behind them, but as time progressed his story changed putting him in the helicopter that was attacked. While i do believe that he may have exxagerated the story to help make it more dramatic while honoring a veteran, i dont buy that he forgot. He talked about the incident correctly in the past, and during such a traumatic event he would have remembered the details. I really dont have much to say other than how dumb can someone be? You’re on national tv reporting a story that you have previously spoken about in a different way, you think no one is going to notice? Come on!
What We Should Ask About Williams’ Mistake
I like how this article was formed in a more step by step format showing how the corrections and/or the consequences progress. I also think the medical perspective is important, although i dont buy it in these instances. Everything else about this article basically alligned with the previous in terms of facts stated. I think its important this showed the consequences because we often are unaware to how things like this play out. I think suspension without pay was a good start, but if there is continued evidence of this happening on key details consitently i think he either needs his brain checked or fired becuase he is creating serious credibility issues for himself and his parent news organization, i mean he’s not seeking truth, he’s just reporting fictional stories.