Modern Journalism has a lower bar than a Freshmans Term paper.
Have you noticed the uptick over the last 10 years in 'anonymous' sources? It was once a standard that you couldn't or at minimum shouldn't post something positioning itself as fact if you couldn't point to a source. In modern times of Cable media, sources seem irrelevant or simply attributes that are noteworthy if you have them.
I think back to College and remember being told that in papers I couldn't write something as a fact without stating a source; fumbling around with the APA sourcing guidelines was mind numbing. Fast forward to today and it seems media outlets can randomly publish fact from 'anonymous' sources and people consume it as fact, politicians respond to 'truth' and Twitter explodes. Does anyone else believe this is crazy? Should we hold official media and speech to a higher standard? Shouldn't the press who claims protections of the first amendment but also wants to be considered factual to at least source their facts to someone or something?
This age of source-less media has brought mass confusion to nearly every aspect of life in the Westernized world - the not so Westernized Civilizations avoid this issue by simply not allowing press. We should demand more, we should not rush to criticize or comment on elements without tangible fact. This hurts both sides of an argument. For those hoping to expose truth, anonymous has destroyed credibility where some should stay intact. Likewise factual responses are peppered by anonymous 'leakers' who are taken as gospel and based on the same principal - faith.
Dan Gillmor from Salon speaks to the contempt that anonymous sourcing in media has for its readers:
Whether the reporters and editors who so casually violate their institutions’ rules are simply arrogant and/or lazy, or whether they genuinely believe they’re providing information that readers need to know, they’re undermining the credibility of their news organizations almost every time they do this. In reality, whether they understand it or not, they betray contempt for their readers, not respect.
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/14/anonyous_contempt_for_readers/
Oh by the way, that was called sourcing, not to APA Standards but sourcing none the less. Perhaps President Trump and his ilk would be seen as more absurd if the medias attacks on them included actual sources.
I think back to College and remember being told that in papers I couldn't write something as a fact without stating a source; fumbling around with the APA sourcing guidelines was mind numbing. Fast forward to today and it seems media outlets can randomly publish fact from 'anonymous' sources and people consume it as fact, politicians respond to 'truth' and Twitter explodes. Does anyone else believe this is crazy? Should we hold official media and speech to a higher standard? Shouldn't the press who claims protections of the first amendment but also wants to be considered factual to at least source their facts to someone or something?
This age of source-less media has brought mass confusion to nearly every aspect of life in the Westernized world - the not so Westernized Civilizations avoid this issue by simply not allowing press. We should demand more, we should not rush to criticize or comment on elements without tangible fact. This hurts both sides of an argument. For those hoping to expose truth, anonymous has destroyed credibility where some should stay intact. Likewise factual responses are peppered by anonymous 'leakers' who are taken as gospel and based on the same principal - faith.
Dan Gillmor from Salon speaks to the contempt that anonymous sourcing in media has for its readers:
Whether the reporters and editors who so casually violate their institutions’ rules are simply arrogant and/or lazy, or whether they genuinely believe they’re providing information that readers need to know, they’re undermining the credibility of their news organizations almost every time they do this. In reality, whether they understand it or not, they betray contempt for their readers, not respect.
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/14/anonyous_contempt_for_readers/
Oh by the way, that was called sourcing, not to APA Standards but sourcing none the less. Perhaps President Trump and his ilk would be seen as more absurd if the medias attacks on them included actual sources.
Comments
Post a Comment