Page 1 of 2

Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 5:36 pm
by Bootstrap
How reliable is a source? What rules should journalists follow? I see these questions almost every day here.

I've always liked the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, which talks about how you can identify reliable sources. Take a look, and let's discuss it piece by piece here.

If someone quotes a single anonymous source, should that be a red flag?

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:14 pm
by Neto
Just thought I'd pull up the oldest thread with no response.

I didn't do a journalism degree in college, but my best friend (& roommate) in college did that degree, went on to get a doctorate in something, maybe English as a second language, and taught in a university in China for a number of years. I knocked around with a Prof in that department as well, and have kept in touch with him (from time to time, on FaceBook now) over the years.

Once, I'd say in around 1995, we were interviewed by an area newspaper, and already having experienced writers who took some liberties with the truth, we made a condition that we would do the interview if we would be allowed to read over & OK the article before it went to print. Didn't happen, and the article contained a number of errors. So I noticed the following right away:
Gather, update and correct information throughout the life of a news story.
Be cautious when making promises, but keep the promises they make.
But that article didn't do the damage that an article written by our own mission about the airstrip project in our village. Who ever wrote the article put it all in my voice, as though I had written it myself. Would have been OK if they had verified it with me, or at least made sure it contained the truth. They took pieces of things I'd written in missionary newsletters and actually made them say the opposite of what I had actually written. In the appeal for funding (that was the purpose of their piece), I took total credit for everything in the whole project. This deeply offended the father of the man who had been the first translator assigned to that tribe, and also the man who was actually heading up the airstrip construction project - our head maintenance man, and also my dad's cousin, who in Russian Mennonite custom I called 'Uncle'. So making sure you have your facts straight, and allowing the people involved to read it through before printing something is of utmost importance.

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 9:55 am
by Robert
Bootstrap wrote:How reliable is a source? What rules should journalists follow? I see these questions almost every day here.

I've always liked the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, which talks about how you can identify reliable sources. Take a look, and let's discuss it piece by piece here.

If someone quotes a single anonymous source, should that be a red flag?
I agree with the code, but realize that people will be the downfall of it.

I actually think Bret Bier does his best to do this. This is why I watch him. I have seen him correct or update stories with facts that clarify not inflame.

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:03 pm
by Ken
There has been a lot written about this topic. One part is dissecting the individual story or report. The other is looking at the source of information to begin with. A tremendous amount of bias is generated, not at the individual reporter level, but at the editorial level in simply deciding which stories to carry and which to ignore. Here is one rating of bias and accuracy that was done by marketwatch:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-b ... 2018-02-28

Image

Surveys' by Business Insider of Americans across the entire political spectrum came up with this rating of perceived bias for various news sources:

https://www.businessinsider.com/most-bi ... 6-ap-23-16

Image

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:54 pm
by Josh
PBS as unbiased :lol: As a former PBS employee, it’s just sad how far this is from the truth.

In my department there wasn’t a single Republican. Almost everyone was a Democrat or a left-leaning “independent”.

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:33 pm
by barnhart
Josh wrote:PBS as unbiased :lol: As a former PBS employee, it’s just sad how far this is from the truth.

In my department there wasn’t a single Republican. Almost everyone was a Democrat or a left-leaning “independent”.
Honest question here Josh, I don't wish to attack you or hurt you and I value you opinion and experience. Do you think the primary definition of "unbiased" is related to Republican or Democratic? Do you think it could have a meaning independent of those specific parties?

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:39 pm
by barnhart
I like the Marketwatch graph, probably because it confirms my own bias. Here is a question about it, why are the organizations that are heavy on fact as opposed to opinion clustered in the middle. It seems conceivable there might be a very conservative source, far to the right, or a very liberal source to the left, whose focus is primarily factual reporting and avoids opinion.

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:10 pm
by Josh
barnhart wrote:
Josh wrote:PBS as unbiased :lol: As a former PBS employee, it’s just sad how far this is from the truth.

In my department there wasn’t a single Republican. Almost everyone was a Democrat or a left-leaning “independent”.
Honest question here Josh, I don't wish to attack you or hurt you and I value you opinion and experience. Do you think the primary definition of "unbiased" is related to Republican or Democratic? Do you think it could have a meaning independent of those specific parties?
It could, but for now, people who identify as “independent” are more likely to consistently vote for Democrats than they are for Republicans. Back when I canvassed first Democratic candidates, independent voters were basically just as good as Democratic voters.

The left is working quite hard to gain a monopoly on what “unbiased” means, and to define what fair news coverage even is. And it looks like they’ve been fairly successful. Obviously, if you want your narrative to win, you’d be well served to disguise your narrative as unbiased, objective, and basically the “truth”. The left has been much more successful at this than the right, who have basically surrendered this territory.

The ultimate example of this is PBS, which is overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats, yet has been able to retain the perception that it is “unbiased”, although their viewership is so low that it probably makes very little difference in terms of the general public’s unconscious biases nowadays.

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2020 10:56 pm
by ohio jones
barnhart wrote:I like the Marketwatch graph, probably because it confirms my own bias. Here is a question about it, why are the organizations that are heavy on fact as opposed to opinion clustered in the middle. It seems conceivable there might be a very conservative source, far to the right, or a very liberal source to the left, whose focus is primarily factual reporting and avoids opinion.
If they avoid opinion, how would anyone know they are very conservative or very liberal?

Re: Journalism, ethics, and truth

Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:06 am
by barnhart
ohio jones wrote:
barnhart wrote:I like the Marketwatch graph, probably because it confirms my own bias. Here is a question about it, why are the organizations that are heavy on fact as opposed to opinion clustered in the middle. It seems conceivable there might be a very conservative source, far to the right, or a very liberal source to the left, whose focus is primarily factual reporting and avoids opinion.
If they avoid opinion, how would anyone know they are very conservative or very liberal?
:) Yes, I see this is very important.