I didn’t get the same reaction when reading TBD’s offerings about its correction. In truth, journalism could do with a little more boasting about transparency. And by that I mean we should strive to have news organizations that put enough effort into implementing the concept that they feel justified in crowing about it.
The admirable thing about TBD’s boast—as opposed to an empty accuracy boast like Dobbs’s—is that it’s rooted in the admission of a mistake. It also stimulates discussion, such as the one that took place on Twitter between Buttry, Robinson and Krewson. If you’re going to boast about transparency, people are going to call you on it. The result is likely to test the limits of your commitment to the concept. It’s either deflating or reaffirming. Either way, that’s a good thing if you’re willing to engage, listen and learn.
The problem we have today is a lack of transparency from news organizations. So if TBD wants to blog about all of the “Likes” and tweets its corrections received, put the offending blogger on air to talk about the mistake and its reaction, and blog about the same, I say good on them. They’re responding to what other people have responded to. They’re explaining why and how Hess added the correction, rather than just have her fix the typo or scrub it.
Of course, this kind of boasting involves risk. If TBD should fall down on the job in terms of corrections or find itself committing a litany of silly, embarrassing, or obvious typos, the copy editor argument will once again rear its head. Rightly so. And if TBD isn’t as open about its failings in the future, this week’s correction will seem like a link-baiting anomaly. That’s fair game, and I suspect Buttry et al. agree.
The key is that they continue to engage when there are errors or issues that aren’t quite so amusing, or good for traffic. That’s the true test of transparency, and it will ultimately determine whether this was empty boasting or an example of their overall approach.
Correction of the Week
“An article in the Sept. 1 El Paso Times stated that Dallas Nights Country Saloon employee Joshua Kennon was engaged in “sexual activity” with a woman and allegedly intoxicated at the time of his arrest. According to an affidavit, he was “making out” with the woman while he was allegedly intoxicated. Also, although the saloon was cited twice for liquor violations, those violations were later dismissed, according to bar owner David Cooper.” - El Paso Times
Good piece, Craig. The issue with me was that TBD and others RT'ing about the transparency issue were suggesting that TBD was particularly special because they corrected the error. I think many news organizations -- not all, but many -- would have done the same thing.
Yes, it's transparent. Yes, it's acknowledging a mistake and setting the record straight. Is it all that unusual? I say no. What made this one special wasn't the correction but the humorousness of the error itself.
#1 Posted by John Robinson, CJR on Fri 15 Oct 2010 at 12:17 PM
Hi John,
Thanks for reading and adding a comment. I think Steve Buttry was accurate in writing that many news orgs would have scrubbed the error or written a vague correction. (A sad truth.) But I also agree that correcting an error isn't reason to crow from the rooftops. I'd compare this to the notable Public Enemy correction from the Wash. Post last year:
http://www.cjr.org/regret_the_error/dont_need_to_wait_get_the_reco.php
The paper did little to acknowledge how popular it had become, and the discussion that it provoked. It also didn't let the writer of the piece talk about what happened. Only the ombud was allowed to address it. I like that TBD wasn't afraid to talk about their correx in multiple venues. That strikes me as different.
Cheers.
#2 Posted by Craig Silverman, CJR on Fri 15 Oct 2010 at 02:03 PM
Fair enough. I know that many newspapers close down as badly as governments doing wrong. I know, also, that many newspapers don't. I hope that if we had a correction as personally inviting -- sex with the writer??? -- and obviously funny, we'd respond the same way with the same sense of transparency and humor.
#3 Posted by John Robinson, CJR on Fri 15 Oct 2010 at 02:11 PM
Back in the late '80s the Lenoir (N.C.) News-Topic had a typo in a recipe, so it showed one ingredient as "child" instead of chile. The correction the next day concluded with, "We do not regret the error."
#4 Posted by Guy Lucas, CJR on Fri 15 Oct 2010 at 02:40 PM
Thanks again, Craig. Good analysis of the situation. I agree with John that many (but not most, I suspect) news orgs are correcting more transparently now. You probably deserve some credit for that. You've certainly been a strong and effective advocate for accuracy, transparency & accountability.
#5 Posted by Steve Buttry, CJR on Fri 15 Oct 2010 at 02:47 PM
"Right here is where we'd normally say we regret the error, but, honestly, a day later, we're still snickering over it like a bunch of adolescent boys telling fart jokes, and to judge from the comments we've received, so are you. So it's all good."
I would greatly respect any news outlet that said something like this under the appropriate circumstances.
#6 Posted by Lex Alexander, CJR on Fri 15 Oct 2010 at 05:56 PM