Wait, Weren't Big Newspapers Needed For Credibility?

from the so-much-for-that-plan dept

Over the last few years, it's been amusing to watch defenders of mainstream journalism trash online journalism by claiming that traditional journalists can do real investigative journalism, whereas online-only sources are too easily suckered into fake stories. In fact, one of the loudest complaints about the demise of newspapers is that no one will do "investigative" reports any more. There's no doubt that newer journalism properties get stories wrong at times, but traditional journalists seem just as likely to screw up as well. Witness the big news about the LA Times getting totally suckered into believing a completely made up story concerning Tupac Shakur's murder. Who broke the LA Times mistake? The online site, TheSmokingGun.com. This isn't to say that new media is any better than traditional media -- but it does highlight that for all the supposed "authority" of traditional journalists and their lofty standards, there's a pretty long track record of stunning mistakes and poorly fact-checked stories made by them.

Filed Under: investigative journalism, journalism, newspapers
Companies: la times, the smoking gun

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    DanC, 28 Mar 2008 @ 8:44am

    Re: Why I drop in.

    I think that most inventors are sick of opportunists stealing their creations, and yes it is flat out theft because it is a constitutionally defined property right

    No, it isn't theft, it's infringement. The Supreme Court of the United States recognized the difference between infringement and theft. Furthermore, the Constitution does not define patents or copyrights as property rights, but simply as "exclusive rights". One would hope an 'expert' would understand the difference.

    And I am a recognized expert about intellectual property issues

    Who recognizes you as an expert? The organizations you founded?

    Frankly the opinions of those who associate with the Piracy Coalition or otherwise stooge for them carry no weight in the inventor community.

    Thanks once again for spreading baseless accusations. You don't actually answer criticism, you just spread BS.

    I am willing to sign my name to what I have to say. It seems many of you do not have the gumption to stand behind what you say, and frankly that makes many even less credible than Mike.

    The ability to publish anonymously is a proud American tradition. The Federalist Papers were authored anonymously, and carried great weight. Additionally, you have previously shown a tendency to make false accusations against those who question your credentials, so posting anonymously to prevent it is perfectly logical.

    Last, once again I must point out that I am fully aware that Mike with never be swayed by reason or the real facts

    You don't offer any facts or reason. You post propaganda. You haven't offered anything to back up your claims, but have resorted to name calling and accusations of corporate affiliation.

    Therefore, the only reason for me to drop in here is to catch the attention of other people who share my views.

    You're scouting for donations. No kidding. You show up on sites hosting blogs concerning patents and/or copyright, throw a few pro-ip/anti-reform lines out, flash your 'credentials', and hold out your hand.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.