As I read the article about Josh Mandel and Politifact, I found myself believing Politifact's assessments without a second thought.
Near the end of the article, I started to realize that I was personally guilty of what the article discusses: believing something without bothering to check into it.
Much like the pharmaceutical industry finances drug trials and studies, politicians would have a huge incentive to fund or influence political fact-checking services.
I have heard of Politifact before. And the fact that an online newspaper uses their statements in print should be enough to convince me. But shouldn't I look at this site for myself? I thought I had learned to be skeptical of information and sources.
I want to end with a wish. I wish there were organizations out there that everyone could get behind--omsbudsmen universally respected for their ability to separate fact from fiction. These people used to be called journalists!
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
10: Code of Ethics for Bloggers
Citizen journalists: a title that has inspired much debate in our class so far this semester. Many of these citizen journalists use blogging as their main platform. I've always considered it a problem that citizen journalists did not operate under ethical codes like they would if they worked for NYT, WSJ, or any other media outlet. How, other than the fruits of their labor, can we determine whether or not a blogger is ethical?
To some extent, material published on traditional media outlets' sites can be believed, though obviously this isn't always the case, and a skeptical eye is always a good idea. Material published on a blog doesn't hold the same amount of inherent value because your average blog does not have the backing of an editing staff or the tradition of excellence enjoyed by mainstream sites.
I was a bit shocked to read Cyberjournalist.net's code of ethics for bloggers. Admittedly, I probably would have known that this existed if I had done any digging on the subject. But it's not a topic that I come into close contact with on a regular basis.
It's a great idea to try to unite bloggers to establish professional guidelines. However, I do have a few reservations.
I wonder how far-reaching this code is. Is this something that has gained a foothold in the blogging world, or is it an anomaly? I would also like to know what percentage of bloggers try to use the code or others like it.
Even though the average blogger may not adhere to specific professional and ethical guidelines, creating a code is a good start toward establishing blogging as a credible platform.
To some extent, material published on traditional media outlets' sites can be believed, though obviously this isn't always the case, and a skeptical eye is always a good idea. Material published on a blog doesn't hold the same amount of inherent value because your average blog does not have the backing of an editing staff or the tradition of excellence enjoyed by mainstream sites.
I was a bit shocked to read Cyberjournalist.net's code of ethics for bloggers. Admittedly, I probably would have known that this existed if I had done any digging on the subject. But it's not a topic that I come into close contact with on a regular basis.
It's a great idea to try to unite bloggers to establish professional guidelines. However, I do have a few reservations.
I wonder how far-reaching this code is. Is this something that has gained a foothold in the blogging world, or is it an anomaly? I would also like to know what percentage of bloggers try to use the code or others like it.
Even though the average blogger may not adhere to specific professional and ethical guidelines, creating a code is a good start toward establishing blogging as a credible platform.
Thursday, March 5, 2015
9: Easy to Fool the Media
One of our readings for this week was about Jimmy Kimmel's famous hoax videos (Poynter Article).
I found this article interesting for several reasons. Of course, it's hilarious. It's also amusing that media outlets might think the videos are real.
Chapter 6 in Elements tells us that journalists are supposed to be independent monitors of power. But who monitors journalists? Obviously, Jimmy's videos are not created with the sole purpose of poking holes in what's supposed to be a discipline of verification, but it's a nice side effect.
I almost wish more people would attempt to fool the media so journalists had experience having to verify information rather than blindly retweeting it.
Hoaxes like this would be an excellent verification activity for schools of journalism. When we're getting ready to write research papers in my English classes, I prime the students with a set of bellringers that contains real websites and hoax websites. Activities like this in journalism schools might provide student journalists the healthy skepticism they're supposed to maintain. By the time they become professional journalists, they'll know to question anything they see, hear, or read.
I found this article interesting for several reasons. Of course, it's hilarious. It's also amusing that media outlets might think the videos are real.
Chapter 6 in Elements tells us that journalists are supposed to be independent monitors of power. But who monitors journalists? Obviously, Jimmy's videos are not created with the sole purpose of poking holes in what's supposed to be a discipline of verification, but it's a nice side effect.
I almost wish more people would attempt to fool the media so journalists had experience having to verify information rather than blindly retweeting it.
Hoaxes like this would be an excellent verification activity for schools of journalism. When we're getting ready to write research papers in my English classes, I prime the students with a set of bellringers that contains real websites and hoax websites. Activities like this in journalism schools might provide student journalists the healthy skepticism they're supposed to maintain. By the time they become professional journalists, they'll know to question anything they see, hear, or read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)