3 ms·

I am usually not one who favors government regulation of journalistic outlets, however I do have a proposal. Media outlets should be required to publish a corr

I am usually not one who favors government regulation of journalistic outlets, however I do have a proposal. Media outlets should be required to publish a correction of a story at least as visible and for at least as long as the initial incorrect version. This would prevent a site from first claiming something and then burying the correction somewhere where nobody finds it.

FabHK 9y ago
In Germany, people covered by factual statements in the news have a right (under certain conditions) to demand a "Gegendarstellung" presenting their reply (consisting only of factual statements, not opinions), and that reply has to be in an equally prominent location/size/etc in the same media outlet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_reply https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_reply https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gegendarstellung https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gegendarstellung
- bonzini 9y ago
  Of course factual statements need not be true. There was a famous case in Italy where a politician denied having been incarcerated, while sending his reply from a state prison.
- blensor 9y ago
  Does a "Gegendarstellung" not require a court order? I would very much love if the media outlets agree on self imposed "best practices for corrections". Which in the end should be a benefit for those complying because they can advertise it and be more believable
  - hwh 9y ago
    The right exists without a court order (and I'd wager it is more often granted than not by established outfits, with notable exceptions like tabloids - like Germany's largest newspaper Bild - and the yellow press). However, some will have to resort to go to the courts if the publishing entity does not comply. Which will take some effort, it being a civil rights matter - e.g. paying court fees up front (and claiming the money back in the same suit, leaving the applicant with the risk of an opposing party with no money).
18pfsmt 9y ago
I think a specific subdomain or directory for all corrections would also be helpful. Visibility should be long term without an expiration or redirect.
- blensor 9y ago
  A separate list of corrections would definitely be a good counterbalance, but it would probably only matter to those who are already trying to verify the correctness of the story in the first place and not to those who took it at face value.
colemannugent 9y ago
This would require the government determine "the truth" which is probably a really bad idea. I'm curious, how would you punish those who did not comply?
- bglusman 9y ago
  would it, or would it leave it up to the article publisher, but say IF AND WHEN you issue a retraction/correction, here is the way you must do it? I don't know that I agree with the proposal per se, but I think this specific criticism is misguided/wrong.
  - colemannugent 9y ago
    Say the fed implemented this as you described: Why would any news company bother issuing corrections then? Publishers would just silently edit the article, forcing the federal government to monitor all news outlets content for changes. In the face of this daunting task, some naive senator would suggest that all news first be submitted to the fed for review. The only solution to this problem is the nationalization of the news media, which would be a very bad thing. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play.

FabHK 9y ago

In Germany, people covered by factual statements in the news have a right (under certain conditions) to demand a "Gegendarstellung" presenting their reply (consisting only of factual statements, not opinions), and that reply has to be in an equally prominent location/size/etc in the same media outlet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_reply https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_reply https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gegendarstellung https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gegendarstellung

bonzini 9y ago
Of course factual statements need not be true. There was a famous case in Italy where a politician denied having been incarcerated, while sending his reply from a state prison.
blensor 9y ago
Does a "Gegendarstellung" not require a court order? I would very much love if the media outlets agree on self imposed "best practices for corrections". Which in the end should be a benefit for those complying because they can advertise it and be more believable
- hwh 9y ago
  The right exists without a court order (and I'd wager it is more often granted than not by established outfits, with notable exceptions like tabloids - like Germany's largest newspaper Bild - and the yellow press). However, some will have to resort to go to the courts if the publishing entity does not comply. Which will take some effort, it being a civil rights matter - e.g. paying court fees up front (and claiming the money back in the same suit, leaving the applicant with the risk of an opposing party with no money).

18pfsmt 9y ago

I think a specific subdomain or directory for all corrections would also be helpful. Visibility should be long term without an expiration or redirect.

blensor 9y ago
A separate list of corrections would definitely be a good counterbalance, but it would probably only matter to those who are already trying to verify the correctness of the story in the first place and not to those who took it at face value.

colemannugent 9y ago

This would require the government determine "the truth" which is probably a really bad idea. I'm curious, how would you punish those who did not comply?

bglusman 9y ago
would it, or would it leave it up to the article publisher, but say IF AND WHEN you issue a retraction/correction, here is the way you must do it? I don't know that I agree with the proposal per se, but I think this specific criticism is misguided/wrong.
- colemannugent 9y ago
  Say the fed implemented this as you described: Why would any news company bother issuing corrections then? Publishers would just silently edit the article, forcing the federal government to monitor all news outlets content for changes. In the face of this daunting task, some naive senator would suggest that all news first be submitted to the fed for review. The only solution to this problem is the nationalization of the news media, which would be a very bad thing. Sometimes the only way to win is not to play.