Quick to report, quick to mislead
BY IAN VAN ORDEN
MANAGING EDITOR
.
Over the last two weeks, two stories have
highlighted an issue that has cropped up
in m odern journalism . The stories, one
a BuzzFeed report regarding President
Trump and the other a standoff between
high schoolers and a Native Am erican
activist, were both found to be false or
m isrepresented soon after their initial
coverage. The stories brought to light the
tendency for news organizations to favor
quick reporting over accurate reporting.
To explore th is issu e, as w ell a s the
role o f jo u rn alism in to d ay ’ s w orld ,
the Clackam as Print spoke w ith Vince
Filak, a professor o f journalism at the
U n iv ersity o f W isco n sin O sh ko sh as
w ell as the author o f the “ Dynam ics of
W riting” textbook.
T he C la ck am as P rin t: W h at do you
perceive to be the role o f journalists in
today’ s world?
A : I think our role as journalists is the
same as it has always been: Seek truth
and report it. That said, we now have to
add more elements to that concept. We
have to better understand our audience,
so we can report the news in a way that
demonstrates why our specific readers
should care about it. We can’t just sit back
and say, “ We think this is important, so
you better listen.” We need to say, “ OK,
here’ s what is going on and this is why
you should care about it, based on what
we know about you as an individual and
as part of our readership.” We also have
to seek facts alm ost more than truth,
because what is true for you m ight not
be true for me. HoweVer, if we can agree
on basic facts, we can eventually come to a
conclusion on how truth tends to operate
for us as journalists and readers.
TCP: Do you believe journalists can be
reasonab ly accurate con sid erin g th e
pace o f to d ay’ s new s cycle, or is th e
pace sim ply too dem anding if modern
journalists are to stay relevant?
A: It’s completely possible to do this. In
fact, a lot of great journalists do this now.
The trick is that you have to prize accuracy
above speed. Part of the problem is that
now there are so many more outlets that
are pumping content out into the world
that journalists often freak out that their
missing something. That “ FOMO” idea
isn’t just a recent concept. When I worked
in newsrooms, we always had a competing
city paper, at least 6ne w eekly paper
and a couple other outlets like student
papers that covered some of the stuff we
covered. The m inute our com petitor’ s,
paper hit the street, we grabbed a copy
and scoured it for things we missed. When
I worked night desk, I was responsible
for watching the three local TV channels
to see if they had anything we m issed.
Later, w hen everything started going
online., we would refresh the browser a
dozen or more times a minute, making
sure we didn’t m iss som ething. Being
scooped sucked and having a scoop was
like the first time you ever fell in love.
However, now information dissemination
is 24/7, anyone with a digital connection
can do it and you have to worry about
more than w hat’s going on in your little
geographic hub. That tends to heighten
people’s anxieties in newsrooms as they
desperately rush to keep ahead of the
story, whatever the story is. In addition,
we have outlets that are clearly partisan
driving an agenda, so people who might
otherwise be objective journalists; find
themselves chasing down things that are
less than objective, for fear of losing the
audience to these other places.
I t ’ s hard to w ait on so m e th in g ,
particularly when it looks like everybody
else has the news and you don’t. However,
if we decide that being right matters more
than being first, we’ll be in much better
shape and have a lot less to apologize for
going forward.
TCP: W hat do you th in k the coverage
o f b o th th e B uzzFeed story and th e
C o v in g to n C a th o lic K ids says about
modern journalism ?
A : I don’t know if this is necessarily a
“ modern journalism” thing, other than
to say the reach of media is now able to
do a lot more damage when a story goes
south. It’s like if I were to be reckless with
a firearm: If I’m reckless with a .22 pistol,
I can hurt some people, but if I’m reckless
with a rocket launcher, I can do a lot more
damage. That’s the difference between
things in the pre-digital era and now.
I th in k the BuzzFeed story and the
Covington ’Cath olic story are akin to
issues we’ve always had: How far do we
trust a source and how is a story generally
Clackamas Print ----------------------------------- —----------
Talia
@2O2Ofight
This MAGA loser gleefully bothering a
Native American protestor at the
Indigenous Peoples March.
582K views
1/18/19 11*13 P M
The politically charged Twitter account
@2O2Ofight originally posted the video of the
students and protestor. The account has since
been suspended by Twitter.
framed. In terms of the Covington story
and the initial video, I think back,to the fall
of Baghdad where newspapers ran close
up photos of Iraqis repeatedly striking
a fallen statue o f Saddam Husein. That
im age’ s fram ing made it look like the
square was flooded w ith people w ho,
now free, sprang fro m their hom es
throughout the country to celebrate the
deposed despot’ s fall. However, other
photos shot from overhead, that never
really got a wide release, showed only a
small gathering o f people and the square
was surrounded b y US tanks, basically
creating a “ velvet rope” of limited access
to the square. In terms of the BuzzFeed
story, I ’ve been on both sides o f that
issue: Pushing against what was basically
a source I wasn’t sure of and defending a
reporter while others called her work into
question based on a source. I don’t know
if it’ s entirely factually inaccurate or what
specific elem ents were just incorrectly
theclackam asprint.com
nuanced. For example, if a police officer
tells you that a person who crashed a car
was operating a motor vehicle under the
influence o f a m ind or m ood-altering
substance, you can’t say “ the driver was
drunk. ” It could be drugs, it could be
medication, it could be alcohol but not
enough tobe legally drunk. I have no idea.
The point is that these issues aren’t new.
We just deal with them on a higher level
now that the stakes are higher and more
of us hear about them .
TCP: D o you b elieve p ublic tru st in
journalism is im portant?
A: Yes. Trust is not a boomerang: When
we throw it away, it doesn’t come back.
If the public doesn’t tryst us, w hat’s the
point of doing the job?
Answer's have been edited for
clarity and space.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ January 30, 2019