Woodward also said it “happens frequently” that a source will publicly deny something the source told the author - and suggested authors understand that sources have to. @amieparnes and I can attest to that.https://twitter.com/HallieJackson/status/1039116414777475072 …
That's the eternal goal, which distinguishes reporters from politicians.
-
-
No, that’s the eternal goal which distinguishes true journalists from tabloid reporters. Once your credibility as a journalist is gone or opinion replaces fact, you are never viewed by that standard again. Unfortunately, politicians aren’t held to same standard of reliability.
-
I agree the burden on us is much greater. There's nothing worse than finding out you reported something that wasn't true, whether it's the spelling of a high school field hockey player's name or something of national significance. We're not infallible, but we issue corrections.
-
Unfortunately, in this day and age, corrections mean very little. Your original story is out there for the world to see, while corrections take a back page and are seldom seen. Case in point, look at how often we see now corrected reports being shared on Twitter as fact.
-
True. The benefit of web journalism, though, is that corrections live in the body of the stories.
-
But that is not the norm. In MANY cases they leave the original article as is and post a secondary with a correction which isn’t equally publicized.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.