DonFerrari on 27 January 2018
Hiku said:
DonFerrari said:
http://www.naosalvo.com.br/desafio-aceito-25-fazer-da-coreia-do-norte-campea-da-copa/
Say what you want but they crossed the point of unverified to posting anything and claiming unverified just to win clicks a long time ago. There is no reason to defend several of the new modus operandi from journalists nowadays.
About more serious problems, not sure where you are from, but Brazil have a lot of issues more important than to know "Trump throwed a lot of food for the japanase fish in an unrespectfull manner"... whish was also fake, because the PM of Japan done it seconds earlier and he just mimicked... that didn't stop a lot of major media outlets from reporting it.
At the same time we have an ex-president being under judgement for scandals of corrupution that cross the multibillion barrier.
|
Thanks for the link.
When it comes to unverified stories, there's not much they can do aside from trying to investigate on their own. But even if they come up short, it's their duty to report it if they consider it significant. (Or profitable, sadly.) What they can do however is verify the identity of the anonymous source. If the source claims they have information from the White House, they verify that this is a person with access to this type of information in the White House before running the story. This is something people in general don't understand.
When Comey's memo's first leaked, several news outlets reported that they independently verified the existence of the memos, but that they had not read it themselves. In other words, they spoke to someone who proved themselves to be an associate of Comey who would have access to such information. In spite of that, and in spite of people like myself explaining this to people, they kept insisting that it was fake news. People's understanding of this processes has become more warped than ever with the President calling everything he doesn't like fake news. It's at the point where even those who do understand the process contribute to this problem, as more than half of people according to a study admit to lying about something being fake news, because it portrays their party in a negative light, even though they believe the story is accurate.
You don't combat misinformation with more misinformation, and the fake news hysteria has gotten far out of hand.
|
I agree one shouldn't fight fake news with more fake news. And most of these so called "studies" are close to being fake studies on very bad premises and false corelation (won't really put the time to investigate it further anyway).
I just wanted to point out that your initial premise of the "serious and credible" work of the journalists aren't like that anymore for a long time.
