Sunday, October 14, 2007
Frank Sesno on the importance of ethical reporting
CNN reporter Frank Sesno gave a lecture at SMU Wednesday and unfortunately I wasn't able to attend...from what I hear though he offered good insight on the need to remain ethical in a competitive news market.
"We (the media) need to force ourselves out of the horse race and onto the issues," said Senso. "I'm talking about war, peace, immigration and outsourcing."
Though news outlets want to be the first to report breaking news, it's so so important to get the facts right first. Take the Killian documents case, for example. On September 8, 2004, Dan Rather reported on 60 Minutes that a series of memos concerning President Bush's Texas Air National Guard service record had been discovered in the personal files of Lt. Bush's former commanding officer Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. The contents of the memos included: Bush being ordered to take a required annual physical, being suspended for failing to do so, and later Killian noting pressure to sugar coat Bush's annual rating report for a period when Bush was not on base. A group of conservative bloggers claimed the documents were fake, but Rather stuck by his story, insisting that the documents had been authenticated by experts. Unfortunately, Rather spoke to soon...he failed to follow up with an investigation and misled the public- the papers were, in fact, forgeries.
On September 20, CBS retracted the story. Rather stated, "if I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question." Many believe Rather's retirement was a result of this incident.
It's important that journalism students view this case as a lesson and I admire Sesno for pointing out the problem. I would hate for any of us to learn the hard way... ¶ posted by Taylor at 10:31 PM •
"We (the media) need to force ourselves out of the horse race and onto the issues," said Senso. "I'm talking about war, peace, immigration and outsourcing."
Though news outlets want to be the first to report breaking news, it's so so important to get the facts right first. Take the Killian documents case, for example. On September 8, 2004, Dan Rather reported on 60 Minutes that a series of memos concerning President Bush's Texas Air National Guard service record had been discovered in the personal files of Lt. Bush's former commanding officer Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. The contents of the memos included: Bush being ordered to take a required annual physical, being suspended for failing to do so, and later Killian noting pressure to sugar coat Bush's annual rating report for a period when Bush was not on base. A group of conservative bloggers claimed the documents were fake, but Rather stuck by his story, insisting that the documents had been authenticated by experts. Unfortunately, Rather spoke to soon...he failed to follow up with an investigation and misled the public- the papers were, in fact, forgeries.
On September 20, CBS retracted the story. Rather stated, "if I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question." Many believe Rather's retirement was a result of this incident.
It's important that journalism students view this case as a lesson and I admire Sesno for pointing out the problem. I would hate for any of us to learn the hard way... ¶ posted by Taylor at 10:31 PM •
Comments:
<< Home
Good post, although you need to understand the bloggers and CBS made the same snap judgments that Rather did.
Part of the reason that Rather is suing his former employer is that the documents have *never* been proven to be false.
The conflict in question was a media controversy, not a legal battle and not a scientific inquiry. There is just as much "evidence" raised by the conservative bloggers that has been called into question as was called into question about Rather's original report.
ALL these actors are moving too fast for proper verification. The problem you cited is real, but bloggers are also susceptible to the same speed pressures as professional media. And they get things wrong, too.
So what's causing this problem? What do we do about this?
Post a Comment
Part of the reason that Rather is suing his former employer is that the documents have *never* been proven to be false.
The conflict in question was a media controversy, not a legal battle and not a scientific inquiry. There is just as much "evidence" raised by the conservative bloggers that has been called into question as was called into question about Rather's original report.
ALL these actors are moving too fast for proper verification. The problem you cited is real, but bloggers are also susceptible to the same speed pressures as professional media. And they get things wrong, too.
So what's causing this problem? What do we do about this?
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home