Mandated abortions. Dying on a wait list. Death panels. The healthcare debate teems with rumors, innuendo, and flat-out lies—ranging from the troubling to the full-on ridiculous. In the past, perhaps, the press could counter such misinformation with the blanket declaration of “we’re not going to dignify that with coverage”; as the platforms for rumor-mongering have increased, however, news purveyors no longer have that luxury. On the contrary: in journalism’s brave new world, the press has a renewed obligation to help its audience sort fact from fiction—to help them understand, in essence, what to believe.

But the line between countering lies and endorsing them has always been a precarious one. And it is one made even more precarious by the fact that, now, there are so many voices able to shout out the truth through noise alone.

Fact-checking sites like FactCheck and PolitiFact engage in admirable truth-squadding; how can the media more broadly adopt and adapt those outlets’ ethos of fair-minded evaluation? Have you come across other news organizations, or individual stories, that have done a particularly good job of debunking rumors—and can you imagine further innovations that could help the press challenge misinformation in a fair and systematic way? Broadly speaking: given today’s media environment, how should the press discredit lies?

Every Tuesday, CJR outlines a news-related question and opens the floor for debate. For previous News Meeting topics, click here.

If you'd like to get email from CJR writers and editors, add your email address to our newsletter roll and we'll be in touch.

The Editors