Poynter Online
Go


Top Story

Young Journalists Use Facebook Ads to Reach Prospective Employers
Most Recent Articles
1.New York Times hires Boston Globe's arts editor
2:56 PM Feb. 9, 2010
2.Blackberry still most popular smart phone, iPhone gains
2:24 PM Feb. 9, 2010
3.Glitches, Delays Disrupt Plans for Virtual Border Fence
11:33 AM Feb. 9, 2010
4.Young Journalists Use Facebook Ads to Reach Prospective Employers
5:20 AM Feb. 9, 2010
5.What Great Bosses Know about 'No Surprises'
4:20 PM Feb. 8, 2010
Most E-mailed
Recent Comments
Recent Tags
Community Activity

Poynter Training
Poynter Seminars
Small, in-person training experiences.
1.NewsU: Picture Editing 101: Essentials and Ethics
Apply NOW
2.Poynter Fellowship for College Journalists
Apply by March 1
3.Making Your Opinion Matter
Apply by March 22

News University
Today's most popular courses on NewsU, Poynter's e-learning site for journalists.
Webinars
Our online classroom is just a click away. Learn more.
All Webinars

Poynter Forums

View Forum Post

Topic: Letters Sent to Romenesko
Date/Time: 5/31/2006 10:20:18 AM
Title: A lousy measure of actual errors
Posted By: Jim Romenesko
 
The correction process is also biased against tough reporting.

Hardly anyone complains about errors that make them look good. All sorts of errors can be found in stories with heroic themes (rescues, crimes solved, etc.) and in stories about politicians, actors and athletes without any complaints.

Lack of corrections should never be taken as an indication that a journalist does quality work. One can write pap and never get a complaint even though the work is riddled with errors of fact, omission and distortion.

Do errors that distort reality by polishing an image differ from those that tarnish? A case can be made that fawning errors do more harm, especially when they advance the careers of politicians, cops, prosecutors, judges, surgeons, scientists and executives who use their power for venal purposes or prove incompetent.

The volume of corrections may speak more of readers than to the publication’s relative accuracy. I read far more corrections in The New York Times than in the New York Post, but then do Post readers have the same expectations of fidelity to fact as Times readers?

Perhaps we should think about corrections as a measure of integrity -- and running many may signify commitment to fact, openness to complaints and high reader expectations.

A quarter century ago I suggested to David Shaw that he undertake a project to verify every fact in one day's Los Angeles Times. The conversation was prompted by my volunteering a correction (which, as I recall, did not run) that we had the age of a woman in a brief item wrong because the official police report was in error, which I learned while doing a follow-up.

David said he could imagine a year traveling the globe and he was certain that he could find some error in almost every article in that day’s paper. We talked about people who get facts about themselves wrong and reporters suspected of piping quotes and of important stories ignored because they were beyond the skill, or interest, of the beat reporter. David observed that most errors would turn out to be second hand, as with the age of the woman, and many others trivial, so that at the end of the day it would be a wasted exercise. I agreed.

One last thought in the hopes it will prompt some deeper thinking about the flaws and biases in correction policies:

There are reporters who spot mistakes in their own work that no one complained about, and submit corrections, a point no reader would imagine based on Mr. Vaden's unqualified assertions at the top of his column. What does it say about our craft that this is the just the kind of stereotypical false impression that is likely to stand uncorrected? [Permalink]

View Complete Forum Topic

Username
Password
New User? Signup Now
Poynter Careers
See All Jobs
Add Your Resume
Post Your Job
Become a Member
More media jobs