If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out — This is a saying popularized by the folks at the Chicago News Service City News Bureau.* Perhaps it’s not as rhythmic as my “verification before dissemination” line, but the idea is the same. In this case, he line is great because it includes a built-in caution about sources. Familiarity and history do not excuse you from checking out the information. Nothing does. (Sorry, mom.)
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is — Journalists are often fooled because we want a story to be true. We want to be able to write about it, we want to be the first to have it. Maybe it confirms something we’ve always believed. Maybe it’s just a great story we can’t wait to turn into a narrative. One illustrative recent example is the fake research report that claimed users of Internet Explorer had a lower IQ than those who use other web browsers. It gave lots of folks a chuckle, and it reinforced a perception. This rule is also useful when it comes to amazing images from breaking news event. Street shark, anyone?
It’s not the crime, it’s the coverup — This applies to transgressions of all sizes. Refusing to correct a misspelled name has the potential to cause far greater damage than simply issuing a proper correction. Blindly circling the wagons without first seeing if complaints and requests for correction are valid only further enrages people. Admit your errors and reap the rewards.
Those are my maxims. What about you? What other rules or clichés apply to accuracy? Put them in the comments and let’s see what we can come up with.
Correction of the Week
In a Sept. 15 “Science,” Daniel Engber mistakenly referred to the latest Transformers movie as Dark Side of the Moon. That’s the title of a Pink Floyd album. The movie is subtitled Dark of the Moon. - Slate
Correction: The organization that originated the saying “if your mother tells you she loves you, check it out” was not called the Chicago News Service. It was called the City News Bureau. Here’s a ninth rule for doing accurate journalism: always double-check names. CJR regrets the error.
>> It’s a cliché to say clichés exist for a reason. As journalists, we’re supposed to avoid them like the, um, plague. But it’s useful to have a catchy phrase..."
The article starts with not one, but two clichés in a row. Yeah, I know, I must be a curmudgeon. But I really don't think it gives the article a jaunty tone. Instead it makes it feel like high school paper written at the very last minute.
The article could start with "It’s useful..." and nothing of value would be lost.
>> Those are my maxims. What about you?
Let's see... I try to avoid clichés and the word "suck". Oh, and...
>> particularly if you’re trying to spread knowledge or change behaviour.
...I'm only human and fail some of the time - but try to not write anything that sounds like maxims from self-help books. I wonder if the "Chicken Soup" books have a journalism edition. I really, really wonder.
Is behavior different if it's written "behaviour"?
#1 Posted by F. Murray Rumpelstiltskin, CJR on Fri 16 Sep 2011 at 04:43 PM
These are excellent Craig. I would add this: It's not about what you know. It's about what you can prove.
CNET broke a story two weeks ago about Apple losing an unreleased iPhone, the second lost unreleased iPhone in two years. CNET also reported that the police were involved in helping search for the device. The piece offered lots of details but the day after the story ran, lots of people started questioning its veracity. Apple reps wouldn't comment and the police initially said they couldn't find any record of a search described in the story.
Two days later, the police flip flopped and confirmed the story's accuracy. Nonetheless, the lesson is that just knowing information is accurate isn't enough. Readers want proof. Generally, it's better to hold off publishing until you can provide that proof.
#2 Posted by Greg Sandoval, CJR on Fri 16 Sep 2011 at 04:55 PM
" Generally, it's better to hold off publishing until you can provide that proof."
Rule No. 9 -- please send to Joe McGinness and Garry Trudeau.
Also the bozos who keep comparing the USA to Japan/Germany/S. Korea, etc. -- yo, the USA is bigger -- duh.
Also the NBC News tear-jerkers about government worker layoffs -- yo, hundreds applied for those jobs -- where were the tears, then? Duh.
#3 Posted by Donald Blake, CJR on Fri 16 Sep 2011 at 07:16 PM
Rule 1. Be aware of your own biases and compensate for them in your work.
#4 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 16 Sep 2011 at 07:43 PM
It was named the City News Bureau. The link had had it wrong, too.
#5 Posted by john tuohy, CJR on Sat 17 Sep 2011 at 08:02 AM
"In this case, he line is great..." should be "In this case, his line is great...". Now re-tweet your article!
#6 Posted by Correctorama, CJR on Sat 17 Sep 2011 at 11:06 AM
In the 1960's Newsweek had an advertisng campaign with the tag line, "Newsweek seperates fact from opinion."
A similar thought was expressed by C.P. Scott, Editor of the Manchester Guardian.
"Comment is free but facts are sacred".
#7 Posted by David Reno, CJR on Mon 19 Sep 2011 at 10:49 AM
Avoid jargon if you expect to be taken seriously.
#8 Posted by Jerry Kavanagh, CJR on Mon 19 Sep 2011 at 12:24 PM
Copy edit! Noticed a few typos. Good article though.
#9 Posted by Lauren Gillett, CJR on Mon 19 Sep 2011 at 05:14 PM
You have to effing kidding me. Anywhere but here, on this page, posted by COLUMBIA SOCIALIST UNIVERSITY. Rules for journalism? YOU destroyed Journalism and turned into JournOlism. Muther effers. DEFUND COLUMBIA.
SUIBNE
#10 Posted by suibne, CJR on Mon 19 Sep 2011 at 08:03 PM
I've always heard the City News Service axiom as “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.” That's a bit more "rhythmic" than your rendering.
#11 Posted by Len Iwanski, CJR on Mon 19 Sep 2011 at 09:15 PM
My previous post should read "City News Bureau."
#12 Posted by Len Iwanski, CJR on Mon 19 Sep 2011 at 09:19 PM
How about include a link to your soy re if it is a press release, study, poll, scientific article, blog post, or another article.
Or if your source is a press release about a 20 page study read the study as well as the press release.
And only retards try to hide their biases. Just be honest about where you stand. Readers trust honesty not fake blandness
#13 Posted by Timothywmurray, CJR on Tue 20 Sep 2011 at 09:09 PM
If you quote a survey or statistics as a fact, always link to the survey or the statistics. If You are unable to find what's wrong with the numbers, your readers will...
#14 Posted by Ole Orset, CJR on Wed 21 Sep 2011 at 12:33 PM
Include the MediaBugs "report an error" button for each story...
#15 Posted by Anna Haynes, CJR on Wed 21 Sep 2011 at 04:49 PM
A good book on this is called "Blur" by Kovach and Rosenstiel.
My own rules to add to yours:
1. Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh
2. Don't watch Fox "News."
#16 Posted by Rich S., CJR on Sat 24 Sep 2011 at 10:49 AM
surely mentioning Bill Maher in the first paragraph discredits everything you say? He's one of the most aweful journalists to walk the earth. In his 'documentary; religulous, he doesn't even let his interviewees speak, 'drowning them in his own gargantuan ego
#17 Posted by ALamb, CJR on Mon 31 Oct 2011 at 01:06 AM
Even the correction on the name of the legendary reporters' bootcamp is not completely accurate.
The wire service was City News Bureau of Chicago.
#18 Posted by Suzanne Hurt, CJR on Thu 31 Jan 2013 at 03:17 PM