3 ms·
Generally speaking, the public are uninformed or misinformed. Rarely does the average person bother to fact-check, investigate sources, or otherwise test and va
by bovermyer 9y ago
Generally speaking, the public are uninformed or misinformed. Rarely does the average person bother to fact-check, investigate sources, or otherwise test and validate information. Even rarer still does someone actually offer up proof that they did in fact do their due diligence. Ergo, the public (vis a vis social media) cannot be trusted.
Professional media, on the other hand, is crucified whenever it fails to fact-check, investigate sources, or otherwise test and validate information. This is because their entire reason for existing is to provide those services.
Just because sometimes professional media sources fail in their mission doesn't mean that their mission is flawed, or that they should give up and let the public handle dissemination of information.
- collyw 9y ago"Professional media, on the other hand, is crucified whenever it fails to fact-check" Not in my experience.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- unethical_ban 9y agoDan Rather, Brian Williams, Brian Ross, Rolling Stone UVA story, CNN re: recent Trump misinformation. "Crucified" is strong, but there are consequences. "On the Media" is a great program for analysing some of this behavior. Also, NYTimes Op-ed called it out recently. Frank Bruni, I think.
- whamlastxmas 9y agoAgreed. There are endless examples of politically damaging stories that make headlines for days and are later retracted with no coverage.