Advertisement
Boards Golf Society are looking for new members for 2022...read about the society and their planned outings here!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

Does old media really factcheck?

  • #1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,447 ✭✭✭✭ expectationlost


    can anyone who has worked in old media newspapers or something like RTE written content tell me how articles are factchecked,I keep hearing all this talk of newspapers being so much better then everything else because of their factchecking but from what Ive seen they don't factcheck they go on presumptions of the reporter often for basic infomation that should be easy to facthceck.

    for articles that appear in the newspaper, not just quick takes, would they have a separate person to the author go through every quantum of an article and check it?


«13

Comments



  • can anyone who has worked in old media newspapers or something like RTE written content tell me how articles are factchecked,I keep hearing all this talk of newspapers being so much better then everything else because of their factchecking but from what Ive seen they don't factcheck they go on presumptions of the reporter often for basic infomation that should be easy to facthceck.

    for articles that appear in the newspaper, not just quick takes, would they have a separate person to the author go through every quantum of an article and check it?

    I don't believe so but I've not work in trad media.

    2 examples

    1. RTÉ bans Connor McGregor ad

    None of the news outlets pointed out that The BAI regulate ads on TV and their code prohibits alcoholic ads by celebrities, AFAIK the ad would be ban in the U.S. Because the FCC don't allow celebrities to suggest they use a a product they don't use.

    2. Danielle Moyles dress down

    Showing some cleavage had one Twitter user explode in anger loss control and become a troll. According to an article by Daniella in the Sunday indo TV3 got some complaints. I don't think TV3 had any complaints and I doubt the her editor took the time to get proof of such complaints.

    Both blown out of proportion for what ever small amount of controversy they might cause.




  • Another example is that of restaurant closures by the RSA without comment from the owners, in some cases it's a very small problem that is fix in a few days.




  • Depends on the "fact"! If its - like Elmo pointed out Danielle Moyles getting the lads out - the fact that TV3 got complaints wouldn't warrant a fact check - who give a fcuk anyway if they did and are they, more importantly, going to be sued!




  • IRE60 wrote: »
    Depends on the "fact"! If its - like Elmo pointed out Danielle Moyles getting the lads out - the fact that TV3 got complaints wouldn't warrant a fact check - who give a fcuk anyway if they did and are they, more importantly, going to be sued!

    I just think if little issues (such as the ones above) are blown out of proportion to make up a story why would such media fact check more than online media on other stories.




  • Big difference in editorial standards between now and 15 or 20 years ago, too.

    Nowadays, there are way fewer subeditors in the production process, and a lot of journalists are expected to sub their own copy.

    It's a very different skill set, in my opinion.


  • Advertisement


  • Big difference in editorial standards between now and 15 or 20 years ago, too.

    Nowadays, there are way fewer subeditors in the production process, and a lot of journalists are expected to sub their own copy.

    It's a very different skill set, in my opinion.

    how can really sub-edit your own copy, isn't the major point of subediting to get somebody else to check your work




  • Elmo wrote: »
    I don't believe so but I've not work in trad media.

    2 examples

    1. RTÉ bans Connor McGregor ad

    None of the news outlets pointed out that The BAI regulate ads on TV and their code prohibits alcoholic ads by celebrities, AFAIK the ad would be ban in the U.S. Because the FCC don't allow celebrities to suggest they use a a product they don't use.
    I looked at bai.ie can't find that
    many of them I read did mention the ASAI Heroes of the Young issue http://www.asai.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/ASAI-Guidance-Note-7.6c-April-2014.pdf, SBP had the story first http://www.businesspost.ie/rte-refuses-to-show-mcgregor-hero-beer-commercial/

    but lets keep this discussion more general, I askiing about proper articles that appear in print not quick rubbish on their websites that they may have copied from elsewhere.




  • I looked at bai.ie can't find that
    many of them I read did mention the ASAI Heroes of the Young issue http://www.asai.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/ASAI-Guidance-Note-7.6c-April-2014.pdf, SBP had the story first http://www.businesspost.ie/rte-refuses-to-show-mcgregor-hero-beer-commercial/ but lets keep this discussion more general I mean I'm talking proper artciles that appear in print not quick rubbish on their websites that they may have copied from elsewhere.

    ASAI is a self-regulatory body, any article I have read in SBP & Sunday Times on media a generally well researched. While she doesn't mention the BAI she did mention their code.

    But yes I agree outside of the copy & paste, though they shouldn't copy and paste.




  • Elmo wrote: »
    Another example is that of restaurant closures by the RSA without comment from the owners, in some cases it's a very small problem that is fix in a few days.

    But you don't need to factcheck a press release from a statutory organisation. What you might do is ask for a comment from the restaurant but you're under no obligation to factcheck what is probably a statutory communication.




  • how can really sub-edit your own copy, isn't the major point of subediting to get somebody else to check your work

    Back in the day, now journalists are expected to be able to spell, write coherently and lay out their own pieces or pages.

    Sub-editors today are probably more concerned with over all look of a newspaper page and the headlines maybe.


  • Advertisement


  • Lux23 wrote: »
    Back in the day, now journalists are expected to be able to spell, write coherently and lay out their own pieces or pages.

    I'm asking about facts not typos, use of the Oxford comma.
    Lux23 wrote: »
    Sub-editors today are probably more concerned with over all look of a newspaper page and the headlines maybe.

    but this is what an editor or sub-editor should do, scrutinise a piece as I said in the OP take each segment of story and independently check if its true.




  • Elmo wrote: »
    Another example is that of restaurant closures by the RSA without comment from the owners, in some cases it's a very small problem that is fix in a few days.

    the RSA?




  • scrutinise a piece as I said in the OP take each segment of story and independently check if its true.

    Even further back in the day, "fact checker" was an actual job, separate to that of a subeditor.

    Then the fact checkers were let go, and the subs took on that role.

    Then (many of) the subs were let go...




  • do newspaper have kind of statement of practice/standards beyond this http://www.irishtimes.com/about-us/the-irish-times-trust
    In pursuance of the foregoing and to enable readers of The Irish Times to reach informed and independent judgements and to contribute more effectively to the life of the community, the following principles govern the publication of The Irish Times: news shall be as accurate and as comprehensive as is practicable and be presented fairly; comment and opinion shall be informed and responsible, and shall be identifiable from fact; and special consideration shall be given to the reasonable representation of minority interests and divergent views.

    or some description of what Irish newspaper do now (not what they used to do) in terms of factchecking the stories they "print" each day
    Above all else, we commit ourselves to accuracy; the most essential test of our profession. We recognise, of course, that journalism operates in a deadline-driven environment in which mistakes can, and will, happen. When we get it wrong, we say so. Readers can make contact with their representative in the Editor's Office to act on their behalf - seeking corrections or clarifications or explaining why none is warranted, as appropriate

    what I want to know about is that first sentence, before we get to the second or third sentence.




  • I'm asking about facts not typos, use of the Oxford comma.



    but this is what an editor or sub-editor should do, scrutinise a piece as I said in the OP take each segment of story and independently check if its true.

    It is what they should do but really a sub-editor is a graphic designer these days, I don't think a sub-editor really does any fact checking and journalists will only do so much. But it really depends on the type of story, a business journalist writing about a billion euro company will cover their bum, an entertainment journalist will probably write their article using vague terms like, "it was claimed" or "alleged".




  • Lux23 wrote: »
    It is what they should do but really a sub-editor is a graphic designer these days, I don't think a sub-editor really does any fact checking and journalists will only do so much. But it really depends on the type of story, a business journalist writing about a billion euro company will cover their bum, an entertainment journalist will probably write their article using vague terms like, "it was claimed" or "alleged".

    ok how does the first journalist cover their bum?




  • ok how does the first journalist cover their bum?

    Well it depends on how the story land on their desk.

    If it's a press release from say ComReg who are saying they are bringing a telecoms company to court for overcharging, they will talk first to the original source if they need something clarified. Then they may put in a call to the company for a comment or "right to reply" as some call it. Then they may look at older stories for some context, background and then maybe they could talk to a commentator on telecoms for some colour.

    Hey presto, there is your story.

    But a lot of business journalists find things out while they are off at events/tooling around town so in this case they need to do a bit more digging to make sure the sources are trustworthy. This might mean talking to other experts, putting a media query into the company in question.

    But if they are writing an opinion piece they can pretty much say what they want as long as they couch it in the right terms. It is unusual for a newspaper to be sued for their opinions, supposedly we all have right to express them.




  • Lux23 wrote: »
    Well it depends on how the story land on their desk.

    If it's a press release from say ComReg who are saying they are bringing a telecoms company to court for overcharging, they will talk first to the original source if they need something clarified. Then they may put in a call to the company for a comment or "right to reply" as some call it. Then they may look at older stories for some context, background and then maybe they could talk to a commentator on telecoms for some colour.

    Hey presto, there is your story.

    But a lot of business journalists find things out while they are off at events/tooling around town so in this case they need to do a bit more digging to make sure the sources are trustworthy. This might mean talking to other experts, putting a media query into the company in question.

    But if they are writing an opinion piece they can pretty much say what they want as long as they couch it in the right terms. It is unusual for a newspaper to be sued for their opinions, supposedly we all have right to express them.

    but at the point of the story being finished wouldn't the best way for someone to cover their bum is get somebody else to read it and fact check it.

    opinions columns should have basic fact checks, for the things the opinion columnists assert as fact.




  • but at the point of the story being finished wouldn't the best way for someone to cover their bum is get somebody else to read it and fact check it.

    opinions columns should have basic fact checks, for the things the opinion columnists assert as fact.

    What do you think a factchecker will do?


  • Advertisement


  • Lux23 wrote: »
    What do you think a factchecker will do?

    well I've read that really deep stories that a factcheker or editor/ producer would ring back every single person and reporter talked to and ask them the same questions, but that might not be necessary on daily weekly stories perhaps I would expect them to read the reporters notes, just to see if the misinterpreted something, and to take every segment of story and check whether its true or not, no matter how obvious it might seem.




  • "We can't fact-check every statement politicians make - it wouldn't be feasible. Most times, we simply report what they say, and let the readers and public make their own judgment." says the editor of the Sunday Times, dismal.




  • "We can't fact-check every statement politicians make - it wouldn't be feasible. Most times, we simply report what they say, and let the readers and public make their own judgment." some the editor of the Sunday Times, dismal.

    Its not up to a publication to 'fact check' something a politician says. If they say it's a fact its to them (the politician) to live or die on their sword.
    Think of the 'facts' that will be hurled by sides if we have a ref on the 8th. No newspaper editor would have the resources to fact that on the fly.
    There was a great site during the US elections that took 'factual' statements from both sides and later drilled into the veracity for the factual par of them.




  • IRE60 wrote: »
    Its not up to a publication to 'fact check' something a politician says. If they say it's a fact its to them (the politician) to live or die on their sword.
    it is if they republish it, they can put a holding doubt and report about more the next day if they are daily paper.
    IRE60 wrote: »
    Its not up to a publication to 'fact check' something a politician says. If they say it's a fact its to them (the politician) to live or die on their sword.

    There was a great site during the US elections that took 'factual' statements from both sides and later drilled into the veracity for the factual par of them.
    the thing we were discussing wasn't an on the fly situation it was something that was said by a politician on October 25th and the column was published on the 13th of November by political correspondent who writes ~2 articles a week.




  • "We can't fact-check every statement politicians make - it wouldn't be feasible. Most times, we simply report what they say, and let the readers and public make their own judgment." says the editor of the Sunday Times, dismal.

    The journalist should report what a politician says, but follow up on that, by asking another politician to comment on the statement or by researching if a fact.

    It is up to the editor to back up the journalist and to question the article before publishing.

    An opinion is very different to a fact, journalist and editors should be aware of the difference.




  • One of the basics I always thought was, having a second source, thus cross referencing the veracity of the story.
    That's why a journalist taking a tweet and using it 'on air' is very poor journalism. You know the one.




  • Elmo wrote: »
    The journalist should report what a politician says, but follow up on that, by asking another politician to comment on the statement
    he said, she said really? from 2 politicians? Is that really good enough?
    Elmo wrote: »
    or by researching if a fact.

    ok you rescued yourself there.
    Elmo wrote: »

    It is up to the editor to back up the journalist and to question the article before publishing.
    the issue we were discussing was a factual situation, the editor just became defensive because journalists imho put other journalists before the truth, neither he nor the journalist were even interested in checking it out even after I queried it and got a rebuttal from the subject. Im not 100% sure its false because the politician won't respond to my queries or the rebuttal in order to justfy the original statement, but I thought a professional political correspondent might be able and interested in getting a response having published the quote without clarification.




  • What is the article we are talking about.

    He said she said is not good enough but the other person may question the so-called fact.

    E.g. You cannot implement a 40% quote to play Irish music artists on Irish broadcasters because of EU law. (Fact?)




  • Elmo wrote: »
    What is the article we are talking about.

    He said she said is not good enough but the other person may question the so-called fact.

    but I'd still expect the paper to research it independently even if they sought a response from another poltician.

    Politics isn’t working Justine McCarthy November 13 2016, 12:01am, The Sunday Times
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/politics-isnt-working-8hsmdblls
    where she included the quote without clarification
    CxayW3_XUAAgeHL.jpg

    background Michael Martin claimed the extra long Dail recess turned out to be unnecessary, is that true?


  • Advertisement


  • mutiple news orgs repeat James Lawless claim that Independent Ministers haven't appeared in SCU ads, but did Shane Ross not do so in Rugby World Cup bid video? https://www.facebook.com/FineGael/videos/10155605244888211/ fb video

    IT
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fianna-f%C3%A1il-proposes-new-law-to-regulate-political-advertising-1.3324526#.Wi_puBVuzvg.twitter
    Mr Lawless said the unit was promoting individual Ministers but not Independent Ministers.

    Irihs Examiner http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/fianna-fail-td-james-lawless-wants-legislation-to-crack-down-on-fake-twitter-bots-464326.html
    “We have seen a lot of promotion of individual ministers, I have a question mark about why some ministers are being put forward rather than others, we haven’t yet seen any Independent ministers featuring in the adverts, which I think is interesting.

    which was from the SCU https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2017-11-14a.152&s=rugby+world+cup+video+and+strategic+communications+unit#g154.r


    If I bumped on this why didn't the reporters who were probably paying more attention to this Rugby world cup business then I was.


    A Sunday Times Editor said of the orignal story I was querying above.
    Most times, we simply report what they say, and let the readers and public make their own judgment.....

    but readers often can't judge something unitl its cleared up, James Lawless did respond to one query I had on his bill but won't reply to a further question.

    it's not practical to fact-check every utterance a politician makes, and then not report those we don't think pass muster.


    but thats what we depend on newspaper to do, they don't always get an answer but they have more leverage to do so then readers. (again its ok to report what a politician says on the day if you follow it up soon after.)


Advertisement