‘Devotion to Accuracy’ means owning up to mistakes
If you’ve ever been closely involved in a news story — either as a participant or a witness — you know what it’s like to turn on a newscast that night or pick up a newspaper the next day and see how it’s been reported. Unfortunately, there’s often something wrong.
It could be as simple as a misspelled (or mispronounced) name or an incorrect address. Or it could be a more significant error of fact, omission of detail or misplacement of emphasis. But one way or another, a reporter’s second-hand version of events seldom matches the recollection or perspective of first-hand experience.
When that happens, it makes everything else you read or watch or hear on the news seem a little less credible. It causes you to question all the other stories with which you don’t have any direct connection. That loss of confidence adds to the public’s growing mistrust of journalists and their beleaguered profession — pejoratively lumped together as the “mainstream media.”
As the Internet has accelerated the speed at which information (both accurate and inaccurate) can be disseminated to every computer screen and mobile device on the planet, mistakes are compounded exponentially. At the same time, the traditional backstops of editors and fact-checkers have diminished or disappeared due to the dwindling resources of established news organizations. As journalism ethics professor Edward Wasserman noted, there’s a lot to be said about “old media values” in today’s online news world:
“Take the idea that it’s right to post information nobody’s really tried to verify. Post what you have, fix it as better information comes to light — that’s the new creed. The notion that some threshold of veracity needs to be met before you publish is some quaint relic, as one news blogger put it, “Journalism 101, not Journalism 2010.”
One of my favorite websites is RegretTheError.com (subtitled Mistakes Happen). Since 2004 editor Craig Silverman has been diligently chronicling “media corrections, retractions, apologies, clarifications and trends regarding accuracy and honesty in the press.” It holds a mirror up to a profession that ought to cherish accuracy above all else, but too often hates to admit its mistakes.
It may be seem counterintuitive at first, but admitting mistakes is the best thing the media can do to enhance their credibility and improve their standing with the public. But when was the last time you saw a newspaper give the same prominence to a correction that it gave to the original error? And when was the last time you saw a TV newscast own up to a mistake with a clear, straightforward declaration: “We were wrong and here’s what we should have reported”? If I ever heard that, I think I’d stand up and cheer.
For more years than I can remember, a standing feature of my column at the Chicago Sun-Times was called “Devotion to Accuracy Department.” There were times when it made two or three appearances in the same week, sometimes just to correct a radio station’s frequency or reverse a few consonants in a set of call letters. As petty as those infractions may have seemed, I felt I was sending a message to readers that if I cared enough to get the small details right, then they probably could trust me on the big stuff, too. Besides, if I were going to call others out for their missteps, I’d better be willing to expose my own. Don’t get me wrong: I was never proud to make a mistake. But correcting it always seemed better to me than trying to cover it up.
I’m sorry to say that’s hardly a universal attitude among my colleagues. I’ve known columnists who’d go to almost any lengths to avoid having to write a correction or clarification, no matter how egregious their mistakes. On the rare occasions they did – usually because an irate editor or company lawyer practically held a gun to their head – they’d write it in such a way that most readers had no idea anything was wrong in the first place. That always bothered me.
As I’ve mentioned here before, anyone who ever attended the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University quickly came to know and fear the dreaded “Medill F.” It was the automatic failure given to a student who made a factual error of any kind on a story. You either became a stickler for detail or you flunked. It was as simple as that. Unfortunately, there’s no equivalent to that in real-world newsrooms or among contributors to the blogosphere. (Ironically, the original version of the blog post in which I wrote about the “Medill F” contained an inaccurate date, which was provided by a source at Medill. But that’s another story.)
Nobody’s perfect. As parents we try to teach our kids to take responsibility for their actions and admit their mistakes. As journalists, we should do no less.
20
01 2010
blogs.vocalo.org
Databases tell us that Rob’s Devotion to Accuracy Department” goes back at least as far as 1998.
His earliest use of the “Devotion to Accuracy Department” dates to his March 25, 1998 column, when he wrote the following: “Devotion to Accuracy Department: Twice in the past week, I transposed the call letters of WTMX-FM (101.9). And in Monday’s column, a letter praising CLTV’s coverage of Harry Caray’s death failed to identify the writer as an executive producer at CLTV.”
Bravo, Rob. One of the countless reasons that you are the platinum standard.
Have to ask: did something specifically trigger the subject?
what about me?
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/blogshakalaka
“i’m addicted to tiger’s sex addiction,” in which i rely on a sun-times blog’s rendition of a story in the new york daily news (.com) that relied on an author who has a source who says tiger is in sex rehab. if that’s not devotion to accuracy, i don’t know what is.
as for this post, there is no amount of fact-checking myopic media dinosaurs such as, oh, cbs can do that can compare with the job millions of fact-checkers in the blogosphere do. we are all journalists now. thank goodness we no longer live under a god such as edward r. murrow, who took side payments from broadcast sponsors and secretly coached adlai stevenson in the hope of getting him elected president in 1956. nothing wrong with advocacy so long as the other side gets to present its side, too. to quote mark steyn (or was it andrew ferguson?) quoting juvenal: “quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” who watches the watchmen?
we all do now.
I’m old enough to remember when Kup had a six day a week column. And at least three days a week he “corrected” an item from the day before.
After a while, I began to understand that the mistakes were intentional, so he could get that person’s name into the column a second time. It was also obvious that the Sun-Times’ editors weren’t allowed to copy edit the column to remove the “mistakes”. It must have gotten him in good with some of the flacks.
As soon as Kup stopped the daily column, miraculously, the mistakes began to disappear! It didn’t make sense to say you screwed up about someone appearing two days ago at a live event.
The Weathermen/women get away with it all the time. And not once do I hear them say they’re sorry.
It’s good to know SOMEONE out there is recognizing the lack of integrity in what we read every day. I have grown so disgusted with websites like the Huffington Post that suck you in with outrageous headlines that end up having nothing to do with the actual article or blow it completely out of proportion. Everyone is just trying to shock and awe their way to more clicks and attention rather than concentrating on getting out accurate information. Nothing is more frustrating than reading an article discussing some new incident, just to find a new articlet he next day that completely contradicts it.
Not getting facts right straight away before publishing, online or print, is inexcusable. Two strikes & you’re out (on your can) on that garbage.
What bothers me almost MORE is heavily biased opinion pieces, chiefly in sports or politics, without taking any responsibility or without much if any attribution. Many sports columnists who ought to know better indulge in this sordid practice. Maybe that’s the only way they can get a job.
At least Bruce Wolf adds a little panache to his verbiage!
i like this correction from the trib the other day:
“In the Classified section Thursday, crossword clue 61-Across was incorrect. Aster is a fall flower, not a spring flower.”
In my opinion Walter Cronkite set the standard for violating accuracy when he allowed himself to be promoted as “The Most Trusted Man In America” when he knew full well that the survey that named him as such was blatantly skewed to have him come out on top (all the other names on the survey were politicians or celebrities – no other TV journalists were included). Take everything claimed about accuracy with a grain of salt.
Mr. Feder, unless you can be certain that your own practices are unassailable, I’d be careful about using your columns to pontificate about ethics.
Perhaps you missed my point, Christian. I’m the first to admit that my practices are as assailable as the next guy’s.
What about George Will???
Bruce, did you know that George Will stole a top secret briefing book from President Carter’s office and provided it to Ronald Reagan to help him win the presidency in 1980? I’m sure that, plus the secret deal the GOP had with Iran to hold the hostages until Ronnie took office helped win Ronnie the White House and destroy the middle class in this once great country of ours.
I realize that mistakes happen especially in on-line news stories and often see them get corrected within the hour, but what drives me nuts is people who log on to the comments section for the story just to rub the journalist’s nose in it. You’ve seen examples of this I’m sure like , “Hey @ss, that street is in Lombard, not Wheaton” or “Hey jerk, it’s SOUTH Kostner not NORTH Kostner”.
I’m sure this type of behavior somehow makes the commenter or critic feel powerful or superior, but really it just makes them look silly.
I am reminded me of the old saying…
“Figures Don’t Lie, But Liars Do Figure.”
Just listen to “Fair and Balanced” FOX News for instantaneous examples of blatant inaccuracies colored as opinion or literary licensee.
Unfortunately I, along with the majority or the news consuming public, have grown numb to all these “inaccuracies.”
In the final analysis, it is all in the “Spin”… Isn’t it?
Not sure if this is getting too far off topic, but the entire point of reporters being unbiased is about done now, too. There are no more journalists…only columnists. Another result of Journalism 2010.
what about the rev. pat?
i hope he’s listening to me noon-3 p.m. sunday on wgn radio and will call in.
george will? yes, i know he helped reagan. which is fine. i don’t mind advocacy. will is a conservative, and everyone knows it. murrow, on the other hand, purported to be objective. thank goodness, the era of the omniscient anchorman is over. by the way, will pretty much lifted a lot of stuff for his baseball book, “men at work,” from tony kubek, good ol’ number 10. but he gave kubek credit.
Forgive me for interrupting “the bruce wolf show,” but when did Edward R. Murrow ever purport to be objective? When he took on Senator Joe McCarthy? When he exposed the plight of migrant farm workers? When he interviewed Marilyn Monroe on “Person to Person”? To my knowledge, Murrow never anchored a television newscast in his whole career. Journalist? Yes. “Omniscient anchorman”? I don’t think so.
All of which has nothing to do with the point of my original post today, which was about accuracy — not advocacy.
good topic.
Does anyone remember “Darts and Laurels” from Columbia Journalism Review in the 80’s, etc. ?
and the book “Red Tape Holds up New Bridge” ?
ahhhhh..the good old days,
DB
You tell ‘em, Rob. And by the way, to Hal Newhouser – you do a keyword search for “Devotion to Accuracy Department” and conclude he’s only been listing errors in his column since about 1998? Isn’t it possible he was doing it well before that but just didn’t call it the “Devotion to Accuracy Department”?
What about Robert Feder?
I went through withdrawals every Friday when he was off, and the weeks he was on holiday were just hell for me. The year he was “silent” was the worst year of my life!!! Well, except for that stint I did in a Turkish prison until they actually figured out it really was just oregano. Still, I now know how to say “prison bitch” in Turkish.
Devotion to accuracy department: I have never been to Turkey, nor in a prison.
But I have eaten turkey, and I prefer the breast. Which is kind of funny, because usually when it comes to birds, I am a leg man. And for those of you wondering, “prison bitch” in Turkish is “hapis fahişe”. Assuming igoogle’s translation app is correct, and the same idiomatic expression works in Turkish as in English. I assume no liability for anyone who reads this post, finds themselves in a Turkish prison and uses that phrase.
Didn’t most of us learn about expository writing, the 5Ws and H back in elementary school? In regards to mentioning “the dreaded Medill F,” you NW grads just like to rub your tummies and schmooze with one another.
My problem with the Old Media is their claim that they are un-biased and just want the “facts.” Unfortunately for Mr. Feder’s purported higher standards, that has NEVER EVER been the case. (And I put it in caps so I REALLY mean it) The “news” is an incubator for bias. But, it always has been. And, since people write it, not machines, it will always be that way. The problem came in right about the late 1960s when the Old Media began to imagine that it was the savior of the country, when it began to think of itself collectively as our betters. They’ve fooled themselves into thinking that their left-wing bias is “truth” and that they will save us from ourselves. Mr. Feder is in that same mode. It just doesn’t show up as much when writing about entertainment.
Lastly, I want to say that I never read a thing by our supposed “Bruce Wolf,” commenter. After all, if he can’t be bothered to capitalize words, or use proper punctuation (or even try to) why should we consider his posts to be informed opinion?
what about -30-?
actually, it’s NU, not NW, but never mind.
as for mr. feder descending from his olympian perch and joining us mere mortals in comment-land, edward r. murrow wasn’t just a journalist. he was considered THE journalist. he was even higher than the “omniscient anchorman.” he was, to paraphrase st. anselm’s ontological proof of the existence of God, that which nothing greater in the mind can be conceived of.
and his accuracy was tainted by his advocacy.
Wow, great dialogue, everyone. A few things:
–Rick Klein, it is indeed possible that Mr. Feder termed his standing feature something other than the Devotion to Accuracy Department, prior to 1998. (and he may choose to pipe in again and let us know) But irregardless (which is not a word and therefore would get someone a Medill F) and regardless (which of course *is* a word), I was merely providing some color to Feder’s “for more years than I can remember” statement about the standing feature that was the “Devotion to Accuracy Department.” Personally, I always liked Feder paying attention the littlest of details (e.g., inadvertently mixing up call letters); as he noted above, someone who cares about the tiniest of details is someone who can be trusted on the largest of ones as well.
–Warner Todd Huston: Dude, you are missing out by purposely avoiding reading Bruce Wolf’s comments. As everyone here knows, I’m a big fan of Bruce, and I don’t mind one bit that Bruce doesn’t capitalize or use punctuation — he’s a commenter (and an entertainer) and not a print journalist. Yes, he’s also a per diem sports anchor at WMAQ-Ch. 5 and therefore still a traditional/MSM journalist. At the same time, his posts *are* informed opinion because Bruce is an incredibly articulate fellow with a ton of interests and who has been on the scene here, observing Chicago media (and politics, and a lot of other things) in town for several decades now. Your loss, pal.
–I’d love it if Feder could tell us what the biggest mistake was, reporting-wise (or spelling-wise) in his career. I don’t expect him to do that (even if it was one that he owned up to in print, years ago), because most reporters understandably don’t like to relive/rehash their mistakes and embarrassments many years later.
–Interesting to see Feder’s rejoinder sounding a little testy toward Bruce. Don’t these guys go out to dinner together a lot?
The supposed “left bias” of the media to which Mr. Huston makes reference is a myth. It is simply the product of the hard-right “working the ref” by claiming “liberal bias” any time the media criticised a Republican, no matter how well-deserved. It was begun around the time of Watergate, and like any big lie, repeated enough it starts to become part of the collective consciousness. If anything, the media, owned by corporations, has a corporatist bias which in our political system is nothing short of hard-right, missing only the selective-bible-thumping puritanical component of contemporary conservatism.
Bravo and thank you, Robert Feder.
This is a wonderful direction for you to be going, raising awareness and sticking it to everyone to own up to their own human errors.
Most of the mistakes are due to laziness or stupidity.
Not owning up is mostly about on-air and print journalists thinking that they’re so above it (or paid so much)that they don’t have to bother.
Lack of TV accuracy is embarrassing many times, but the lack of substance on the news and local broadcasting is even more of a problem.
(back to WTTW and other important matters Feder has, thankfully, helped surface.)
“Anyone with an Internet connection and an opinion can be a journalist” – Steve Leventhal
Bruce, thank you for correcting me on NU. Before sending my comment, I sat there looking at NW and not thinking it was correct. I’d get an F for that one. Here’s hoping that if….should…when JB ends up at WGN, he rallies to have you join him on a regular basis as his smartalecky sports sidekick. Some of the best writing and insight comes from the knowledgeable sports columnists in Chicago that are characters in their own write. You are all treasures.
Robert-
Either way, I still enjoy reading your columns and following your column updates on Twitter. I miss the olden days of your column appearing in the Sun-Times!
Nobody is perfect. Nobody ever will be. I have never noticed your minor mistakes. Enjoy and keep writing!
In the UK the ‘Guardian’ newspaper has a corrections and clarifications column every day and that gives the readers some idea that what they are reading may be a close approximation to the truth. The paper always used to be so full of typos that the satirical publication ‘Private Eye’ always referred to it as the ‘Grauniad’! It’s a pity that these days the slightest transgression in grammar or a mispronounciation is leapt on immediately and perhaps the meat of the piece is then lost. Anyway kudos to your ‘devotion to accuracy’ Robert. Keep it up.