|
Not much gets me as riled up as much as bad journalism does. The impact of bad reporting has lead to deaths, riots, cultural arguments, hatred, sorrow and certainly has helped the terrorist recruitment effort. We need to prevent the damage the media can, and does, inflict in this new world order.
My very talented guest, Craig Silverman, founder of the non-partisan blog "Regret the Error" and author of several books, focuses on efforts to keep the media accountable and transparent. Let Craig explain more about his important efforts in this interview.
Gabrielle Reilly: So you launched Regret The Error to expose media errors. How long has your site been around?
Craig Silverman: The site launched in October 2004. My idea was to showcase the best of the worst of media errors and corrections, and to report on trends regarding press accuracy and corrections. The site attracted about 10,000 people that first day, so I immediately realized I would need to spend a lot of time on it.
Gabrielle Reilly: Can you tell me about the success of your site?
Craig Silverman: One of the successes of the site is that it has made some journalists and media organizations think about accuracy and corrections. I've been reasonably effective at raising the issue and communicating the importance of accuracy and corrections. I've heard from journalists all over the world. They ask for advice about correcting a specific error, preventing mistakes, handling errors online etc. I'm always thrilled to offer help and advice, but my hope is that we as a profession can come together to find ways to raise our standards and share knowledge. That's when we'll see a real impact.
Gabrielle Reilly: What news error reported in the last five years do you think has caused the most damage internationally?
Craig Silverman: The mistake that comes to mind is Newsweek's report that U.S. soldiers may have desecrated the Koran -- and perhaps even flushed it down a toilet -- during interrogations. This mistake had several notable aspects to it. The story, published in May 2005, was very short. It cited an anonymous source, which is always of concern, especially when the claim is so inflammatory. The magazine did attempt to confirm the story by contacting two Defense Department officials to see if they had any objections to the report. The officials didn't raise any specific objections, so the magazine went to print. Once published, it set off a wave of controversy. Some questioned the claim, others used the report to inflame tensions and question Newsweek's standards and objectivity. The White House Press secretary demanded a retraction. Newspapers in Pakistan and Afghanistan re-reported the story and used it to generate outrage against the U.S. This outrage, which to be fair was not solely based on the Newsweek report, eventually spurred on riots that killed up to 15 people. After initially refusing, Newsweek eventually retracted the report. This error included several notable elements: the anonymous sourcing, the magazine's initial refusal to retract the article after it couldn't find other sources to bolster its report, the way the report was used as a political and rhetorical football, and finally, the result that no one really knows where the report came from or if did in fact have a sliver of truth.
Gabrielle Reilly: What measures were taken to correct the story?
Craig Silverman: This is an important element of the Newsweek episode. The magazine initially offered the typical "we stand by our reporting" response in an Editor's Note. But Newsweek's editor also apologized in case they had ".got any part of our story wrong..." So at that point it was clear that they didn't know what was true and what was false. Yet they refused to retract the story. They finally caved and issued a one sentence retraction: "Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Koran abuse at Guantanamo Bay."
Gabrielle Reilly: What impact has the age of 24/7 mass media had on global events, war strategy etc, compared to the pre internet, cable, satellite TV era?
Craig Silverman: In terms of accuracy and errors, the 24/7 media environment has raised the stakes. An error can travel farther, and faster than ever before. It's very difficult to offer a meaningful correction when a mistake can travel at such speed. How do you correct all the blogs that may have cited the mistake? How do you deal with cached page in Google, transcripts and news databases? It's a real challenge.
The press has always been addicted to speed. Journalists are taught to revere the scoop, to get it first. We're also taught to get it right, but that value can be sacrificed at the altar of speed. Speed isn't always a bad thing; our 24/7 media environment has given new meaning to the concept of breaking news. The Internet has also made it possible for citizens to participate in reporting and even help correct errors. I think that truth and accuracy benefit when you can disseminate news and events from a live camera, cellphone, Twitter, blog etc. And, of course, the press has made some terrible mistakes when it had the luxury of time for thought and consideration, so speed isn't always a bad thing. (Jonathan Landman of the New York Times articulated this in a recent letter to the paper's Public Editor: http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/another-view-the-promise-of-real-time-reporting/.) The key is to recognize the things that the 24/7 world can do well, while also being cognizant of the role it can play in spreading errors and misinformation.
|
