Feeling Misquoted? Weblogs, Transcripts Let The Reader Decide
from the increased-openness dept
Mark Glazer over at OJR has written about a series of very recent cases where folks online have shown how reporters have taken quotes out of context to further their own stories (in some cases to the point where they completely changed the meaning of the quote). He points out that, thanks to online transcripts and resourceful bloggers, many of these misquotes are quickly being discovered and exposed. He wonders if journalists are just getting worse – or (much more likely) they’ve always been this bad. Hopefully, this increased level of openness will make reporters (and editors) think twice about repackaging an out of context quote for the sake of sensationalistic journalism.
Comments on “Feeling Misquoted? Weblogs, Transcripts Let The Reader Decide”
Cuts both ways
It could be that ethical standards of traditional media declined in the first place because the internet made profit margins slimmer, and media is under pressure to cut costs.
For now, bloggers are patting themselves on the back for playing the watch dog/underdog role, but we’ll see what happens when people start performing conspiracies by blogging — e.g. a journalist who did quote correctly is accused by multiple bloggers of misquoting.
Re: Fake photos too
Back during the Yugoslav conflict, a British journalist took a picture of a Bosnian heroin addict through the fence of a chicken coop and called it a “concentration camp photo”, leading Western nations to anti-Serbian frenzy. Future bloggers will have all the more opportunities to make fake photos that “expose” whatever.
Re: Cuts both ways
Absolutely. But, hopefully, any such mischaracterization on either side will get called out quickly.
It’s certainly not a perfect way of doing things, but it’s more likely to get out the full story.
Re: Re: Cuts both ways
>Absolutely. But, hopefully, any such mischaracterization on either side will get called out quickly.
>It’s certainly not a perfect way of doing things, but it’s more likely to get out the full story.
I’m not so sure. If the story takes place in a setting that is difficult to verify, it’s easy for bloggers to make up a “full story”. It will be easy for professional propagandists to infiltrate the web culture and make up realistic-sounding stories. We may be entering an era of a credibility crisis, in which nobody is trusted to have an objective view.
Re: Re: Re: Cuts both ways
I’m not so sure. If the story takes place in a setting that is difficult to verify, it’s easy for bloggers to make up a “full story”. It will be easy for professional propagandists to infiltrate the web culture and make up realistic-sounding stories. We may be entering an era of a credibility crisis, in which nobody is trusted to have an objective view.
Well, that’s exactly the point, isn’t it? If the story is difficult to verify, then it raises doubts.
Reporting truth
I’ve been a journalist for almost 20 years now (eek!). Most of the people I know TRY to be as accurate and truthful as possible, but there’s a lot of time pressure, scoop pressure, financial pressure and managers who loves young go-getters. Unfortunately there’s very little nurturing, mentoring, dues paying or ethical discussions until something like Jayson Blair happens.