GRADE  THE  NEWS

 

 

 

5. Did one of the mediums have more reliable news sources than another medium? Did one of the mediums consistently have more unreliable news sources? (For example, were newspapers more unreliable than Internet-only news?)

 

Broadcast tended to have more reliable news sources than other media. This is because most of the sources that were quoted were filmed and clipped into the broadcast, which made it important for the name and status of the person to be listed. It’s harder on air to play visual material if no sources choose to be named or filmed for the broadcast.  However, because of this necessity of having visual images of sources, the medium tended to interview less noteworthy people. They included a lot more ordinary citizens to validate the information shared in the broadcast. Citizen interviews have both positives and negatives. They add diversity and give viewers exposure to a variety of opinions on the story. However, they also deplete the story’s credibility because they aren’t expert opinions. The broadcasts were most successful when they included a mix of notable and ordinary sources. NBC did well with sources, scoring the best out of all the publications and broadcasts on source attribution. The two organizations that scored the least on source attribution were the two wire sources, the Associated Press and Reuters. The wires included several sources and provided great information from people who may have been credible. However, what hurt the organizations when scoring was the  lack of direct names of sources. Both wires were content to write “police said” or “sources report” for their attribution. While the police may be a respectable sources, the name of the specific officer or policemen who provided the information is vital in determining the sources credibility. McManus (2012) suggests running a ‘PIE’ test on sources in a publication. This is when the grader determines the proximity, independence, and expertise of the source. McManus writes, “The PIE criteria are well and good, but what if you can’t identify sources? Or it has a vague name wrapped in stars and stripes, like ‘Citizens for American Progress’? Legitimate information sources will always disclose who they are” (pg.  155). The consequences of not naming a source are big. McManus further writes, “The primary reason an information-provider -- whether on a Web site or online video or in a viral email -- chooses not to identify, or to mis-identify, itself is to disarm the audience. Deception automatically invalidates content.” Although we do not believe that the Associated Press or Reuters did not identify sources to disarm the audience, the quality of reporting by the two news organizations would greatly improve if they included the names and positions of each source they mention in the article.

 

6. Which news sources portrayal of itself diverged most from its actual news coverage? (For example, did The New York Times say it has the most unbiased news out there, but eight out of ten of the stories you analyzed ran incorrect information attacking one political party or another?)

 

BuzzFeed News is attempting to reinvent itself and gain credibility as a news source. “BuzzFeed must be in the real news business,” said Kenneth Lerer, chairman of BuzzFeed (Saba, 2014). The new site has started to publish more in-depth, journalistic articles in the recent years. According to Jennifer Saba (2014), “BuzzFeed is now among the top 10 most-visited news and information sites in the United States, joining the ranks of established media outlets like CNN and The New York Times.” The organization is trying to paint itself as a legitimate news source. However, it still scored one of the lowest grades out of all the material graded at a 29.8%. The organization still runs articles such as “Aéropostale CEO says teens in its clothes will “not be teased or made fun of” and “Jon Stewart got serious while discussing Eric Garner.” Kyle Acquistapace, a partner and director at Deutsch L.A., said, “What causes the question mark in BuzzFeed is if it can credibly make news when the top thing on its home screen is '28 things that people with big boobs can simply never do.” The organization does post legitimate stories, but it also publishes many that can only be described peripheral. The Associated Press’s portrayal of itself also diverged from its actual news coverage. On its website, the Associated Press (2014) wrote that it’s one of the “ largest and most trusted sources of independent newsgathering” and that it has a “commitment to the highest standards of objective, accurate journalism.” However, they failed to accurately and clearly cite their sources. This hurts their credibility and makes it seem like they are not as committed to publishing accurate and transparent information as they proclaim.

 

7. Based on class readings and all of the aggregate information you’ve gathered throughout the term, what are some ways that you think these news sources need to improve their work? 

News sources across the board should be more transparent. A big focus of the Society of Professional Journalist’s Code of Ethics is accountability and veritably. The code (2014) states, “Identify sources clearly. The public is entitled to as much information as possible to judge the reliability and motivations of sources.” Most publications failed to clearly identify their sources, preferring to use all-consuming attribution such as “police said.” This is not clearly labeling sources and the information cannot be checked by a third party. The Code of Ethics goes on to say, “Consider sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Reserve anonymity for sources who may face danger, retribution or other harm, and have information that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Explain why anonymity was granted.” Some of the news sources did explain why they refused to name sources if the source was the key component of the article. This was good and allowed the reader to understand why the person remained anonymous in the paper. However, multiple sites did not name sources who were not the main source of the article. Naming sources would be the biggest change the news organizations could make to improve their work. The code also said, “Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.” There was a difference between how the various new sites handled the Ferguson issue. Reuters sought out input from the father. However, other sources that were graded focused only on comments made by lawyers, judges, and experts. A final way to improve the work of the news organizations would be to include more women as sources in reporting. News organizations should seek out and accurately report minorities. Women should have been included more often than they were by the various news sites. Including women adds another viewpoint and greater diversity to the articles produced by the different media.

 

8. How would you tweak the news scorecard to improve it? Or do you think it was a comprehensive analytical tool?

The news scorecard should include a way to grade the paper as a whole instead of on each individual story. On one of the days of The Salt Lake Tribune, the newspaper devoted individual stories to different perspectives of a racially-charged case. Overall, the paper was very diverse, but each individual story ranked low in diversity because the article was only specifying one group. If the score card included a section for the overall performance of the paper in each area, it would be more fair for these kind of stories. However, the Huffington Post had a section dedicated only to minority issues. While this shows an attempt to better include minorities, it inadvertently discriminates against minorities because it puts them in box as if they only belong in one section of the publication. Also, people would have to actively seek out these stories in order to get a well-rounded diet of news. Adding a section that rates the overall performance of the paper would give this organization points for including diverse groups while also docking them points for not including diverse stories in the normal, staple articles of the publication. This system would be more effective and accurate and grading the news.

 

9. What recommendations would you give to news consumers based on this analysis?

News consumers should be actively contemplating and analyzing the news they read. Even if a publication or broadcast is well-respected, consumers should always be searching for second opinions to evaluate what they hear or read. Mistakes or lies can occur, even if a news source is well-respected and admired. We hope this analysis has enlightened our viewers of the hidden biases and faults of new organizations. News consumers should check to see where their news sources are getting their information. McManus’ PIE evaluation (2012) is a useful tool in determining the credibility of sources (pg.  155). If a publication does not list the name of sources then the information should not be taken seriously by the consumer. If a news source must not be named, the organization should clearly state why the name of the person cannot be reported, as outlined in the SPJ Code of Ethics (2014). A final piece of advice for news consumers is to seek diverse sources. If publications aren’t purposefully seeking out diverse sources, a consumer should look elsewhere to ensure a well-rounded media diet that fairly and accurately represents all sections and sides of an issue. Good luck as you participate in the world’s network of media and news!