Abstract #2
As far as the Skeptical Editing article is concerned, I thought it was a good read. As we discussed in Editing and thus far in Advanced Editing, being a skeptical editor is something that is far too often overlooked in the pursuit of getting something published. I think it’s in our human nature to rush things and be careless at times. We engage in groupthink because we don’t want to cause problems, ask the unpopular question or we wish to avoid an awkward situation. My friend recently asked me how the editing process at a typical paper works. After explaining how many steps and people a story goes through, he asked me how errors still get into publication. The simple answer is that we are human and inevitably mistakes will be made. In reality, however, errors often slip past all the safeguards put into place because many people believe the same, incorrect things or are unwilling to challenge a questionable story. Such mistakes could lead to a correction or retraction at best and a lawsuit at worst. Therefore I agree with the article that we need to be suspicious, if not somewhat paranoid, of what we read.
The idea of joint operating agreements between newspapers is, I think, a useful tool in our business. Although it seems silly or paradoxical at first, it actually makes sense. I think competition, and the differing viewpoints that come along with it, is an essential part of the media. Yet there is the stark reality that news is a business. Without money-saving techniques, such as the joint operating agreement, there would be much less resources available to journalists and, in turn, the public would be less informed. Take the case of the Independent Florida Alligator: Were it not able to use the same presses as the Gainesville Sun, it would simply not exist due to budget constraints and the like.
The last three articles, dealing with hyperlocal or citizen journalism, brought up many interesting concepts-though they were a little dry. The point that stuck with me the most was the one from the creators of iBrattleboro and how they felt traditional journalists were resentful of them. It does seem that the term “journalist” does carry with it a certain weight and most people seem hesitant to apply it to something like a blog or a startup hyperlocal Web site. Yet I do like the idea that it makes traditional journalists a bit uncomfortable with the path news is taking and, in the process, examine where the industry currently lies. In this way, there will hopefully be a collective improvement in the way news is reported such as more community input, more attention on smaller towns and increased opportunities for untraditional stories that may be deserving of attention.
Case Study: Eagle Snatches Dog
As we discussed in class, I think this story highlights the fatal error of groupthink or the notion of “facts getting in the way of a good story.” Going along with the ideas mentioned in the Skeptical Editing article, I believe the blame does not lie solely with the editor or with the reporter. It was careless on both parts; the editor should have had his “BS” meter better tuned and the reporter should have done more … reporting. The story is poorly written. Having only one source, especially one that wasn’t even directly involved with the so-called incident, screams sloppiness. However, as I mentioned before, journalists are human too and sometimes it’s not so easy to avoid making a mistake.
Leave a Reply