I'm Saying It....The New "Media" Can be Dangerous and Irresponsible

[Socal31]

In a race to get the "scoop" yesterday, national media reported the following incorrect information:



- The shooter's name, later retracted

- Three shooters involved

- Two Shooters Involved

- Type of Weapons Used

- Someone shot at Whitehouse (turned out to be Fireworks)




I am for the rapid dissemination of information in order to save lives, but can't we find a balance? I remember when rumors were left to TMZ and National Enquirer. If I was a Journalism instructor, at any level, I would use yesterday as a perfect example of how NOT to approach breaking news.

They need to get off of Twitter and go back to fact-finding.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. I don't think the problem is confined to the "new media."

Easy to find MSM screw-ups.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/17/cnn-boston-arrests-media-nbc_n_3102680.html

CNN and other outlets found themselves with egg on their face when they reported that an arrest had been made in the Boston bombings and were then forced to walk that news back.

Though it was not alone, CNN took the brunt of the blame for its faulty reporting. It was the first and most prominent outlet to tout its scoop.

The network's John King, citing multiple sources, said that an arrest had been made. Fran Townsend, a contributor to the network, also said it had been made.

The Boston Globe agreed. Fox News also reported an arrest. The Associated Press did so as well.

And this…

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-01-04-mine-media_x.htm

Media forced to explain inaccurate reports on tragedy
By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY
Newspapers, wire services and cable news networks all failed in one degree or another to do their jobs properly when they reported that 12 men had survived the coal mine disaster in West Virginia, media critics and chastened editors say.

[Warpy]

2. Some stories require the sniff test

and some of them are wacky enough to require a 72 hour sniff test.

Relying on the Rumor Mill (Twitter) for any truth is insane. Oh, you get some truth some of the time, and if it's coming from several sources on different hashtags who aren't retweeting, you can reasonably expect at least a 50-50 chance of confirmation. Other stuff is just noise.

Reporters need to go back to the field instead of sitting at their computers, in other words, and start relying on people who might know what's really going on.

[alsame]

3. Chuck Todd and CBS both

got it wrong.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/in-todd-we-trust-tweet-dont-verify-new-trend-in-reporter-race-to-first/

[cthulu2016]

4. The POLICE were saying a lot of that stuff

They wouldn't say it if they didn't want people to know it, at the time.

So its mass dissemination ought to be a feature, not a bug

[HolyMoley]

5. Trust, but verify.

there's a two-fold problem here, and it's not all the medias fault.

One: They need to stop relying on social media feeds (Twitter), and social media websites (FaceBook), as a source of information.
Barring solid, valid, reliable confirmation of the above sources, they shouldn't even be reporting or disclosing that information.

Two: Sometimes, it's the supposedly 'reliable' source that divulges the wrong info to the media.
In that type of situation, whom is the media to trust or got to if the investigators
and spokespersons are the ones releasing the "facts" prematurely? Does the media have an obligation to investigate further, or should they take the relevant authorities word for it?

One of the most recent examples that comes to mind was when investigators mistakenly identified the shooter at Newtown as the brother (Ryann), of Adam Lanza. This all came about because he had stolen his brother ID, and it was found on his body... conclusion; Ryann Lanza was the shooter. As a result, the poor kid had his name plastered and spread all over the news and Internet as being a homicidal maniac. Friends and associates abandoned him.

There needs to be a media blackout following events like these; be it 24-36-48 hours, how ever long it takes until verifiable facts are known.

[Luminous Animal]

6. It was old media that printed rumors. Twitter is a social network.

[trumad]

7. LOL---I'll take new over old any day of the week.

Then again---we could all go back and read Judy Miller stories.

[KurtNYC]

8. How does any of those mistakes = "new media dangerous"?

Very common for the first reports to contain errors. More people should be skeptical of media -- Blind trust in the media is what is dangerous.