I felt like we kind of stopped making progress on this one. Instead of a range of sources, many stories just had voices from one side of an issue, but not the other. Many lacked neutral experts that would have helped readers decide which side was closer to the truth. Still some issues with a lack of attribution, allowing readers to know where we got the information. Too often we told readers something, but failed to show them quotes or data providing evidence for the point being made.
Plus, we had a fatal. In one story, we wrote MSU has almost 40,000 students. I think you may have gotten that stat from a student you quoted. Even though that was the person's quote, we should still double-check out facts to make sure what we were told was right.
And a quick check of MSU's Web site found that the school currently has almost 50,000 students. That's a fatal, then.
Let's think back to the first few days of class, when I shared with you this saying:
If your mother says she loves you, check it out.
What it meant was, if you are told something, then go find evidence to support what was told. In the case of your mom, it would be proof that she really loves you, such as documentation (holiday cards she got you every year, expressing her love of you) and interviews (relatives and friends who say she always talks about how much she loves you) and facts (she has never missed getting you a birthday gift, supporting the idea that she really loves you).
We really needed to do that here. Journalism isn't about writing; it's about getting it right.
No comments:
Post a Comment