“In a story on Page 3-A of Wednesday’s Independent about the Big Brothers Big Sisters’ Trail of Terror haunted house, a reaction to strobe lights should have included the word “freaking.” The word was replaced with asterisks, perhaps causing confusion about what was actually said. The Independent apologizes for this confusion and the impression it left.” — The Grand Island Independent
Behind the News
12:09 PM - November 6, 2009
Truth or Consequences
“We need more journalists who will bleed over their mistakes”
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
What to do if you find a baby bird
Expert advice
Inside Google’s secret lab
We might deplore the practice, but posting pictures of our food online is a way to bring everyone to the table
How the ‘World’s 50 Best’ list changed the way elite restaurants do business
“Every time the restaurant switched up its format, it got plenty of accompanying media coverage that let judges know they needed to return to see what was going on”
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Misspelling a person's name is a common but understandable error, but ultimately a minor sin in journalism. And of course, it should be corrected with regrets.
But where is the accountability for the massive, hysterical misinformation foisted upon us by irresponsible news outlets during Balloon Boy and more recently the Fort Hood incident? Glenn Greenwald details here how, with respect to the Ford Hood incident, just about every single relevant detail was misreported, in extremely irresponsible and egregious ways by most major news outlets, especially CNN, MSNBC, ABC, Fox, and the New York Times. Every rumor and speculation was circulated and repeated in a total, massive abandonment of basic standards of journalism.
And here, even at CJR, we have apologists for this irresponsible reporting, where Greg Marx asserts that one can't blame journalists for running with this wild speculation because of "competitive pressures." That's hogwash. Who are we news consumers to turn to for accurate reporting of the facts at times like this if not professional journalists? What is their value added if all they do is sit around the news desk and repeat what they see on CNN and read on Twitter. Who is responsible for the fact that MOST news consumers who followed this story were completely misinformed all day long as reporters breathlessly repeated rumors and speculation as fact with abandon?
THAT is the atrocious reporting that needs some kind of accountability. I think they have the name misspelling covered. Accountability for the BIG sins doesn't seem to exist in your profession, Craig.
#1 Posted by James, CJR on Sun 8 Nov 2009 at 11:20 PM
"We can probably all agree that punching someone in the face is not the best remedy."
Speak for yourself.
I think this story is biased against face-punchers. Let's leave the pro-civility slant out of this and let the reader decide whether a punch in the face is deserved.
"But if you keep spilling coffee, and perhaps break a mugs in the process,"
Heh!
Heh!
#2 Posted by Hardrada, CJR on Mon 9 Nov 2009 at 05:19 AM
"Probably not appropriate" implies there are times when it is. Would those include punching, say, Alessandra Stanley?
#3 Posted by Graydon DeCamp, CJR on Tue 5 Jan 2010 at 03:10 PM