After reading the different cases of trend stories, I think that quality reporting should be done on every level - even nationally. Sources' information should be double-checked, especially if the source is not an expert in the area he or she is discussing with the reporter. Even if the story has been reported locally, quasi-locally and even nationally, each and every reporter, content editor and copy editor should be skeptical of the details. They should be exceptionally critical of the details if the details originated in quotes. Also, information from a handful of sources should not be the sole source of information, especially if there is nationally accredited facts about the issue, such as the New York Times' story on evangelical church attendance. And though information is in abundance in this Internet age, CBS should not have manipulated the good facts it did have just to create a shocking story. Trend stories need quality back up - and lots of it. "Solid numbers" are difficult to come by, but journalists have the job of tracking them down.
In terms of the library story published in the Sun, the library's visitors did come to use the computers to apply for jobs, but these individuals were never asked if they lost their jobs because of the worsening economy. They could have been fired or laid off for a variety of other reasons.
The story also does not go into detail about whether or not the library's visitations increased for other reasons. The population could have grown, causing more library visits. Thus, I believe that while the headline might not be completely incorrect, it is not strongly backed by the information provided in the story.
Even if there is a large quantity of stories on an issue, the reporting could be entirely false. It is the role of an editor to ensure the quality of every story put under his or her scrutiny.
No comments:
Post a Comment