2 ms·
If you fact check and you're right, you've wasted your time. If you fact check and you're wrong, you either can't publish (wasting the time you took for the st
by mannerheim 4y ago
If you fact check and you're right, you've wasted your time.
If you fact check and you're wrong, you either can't publish (wasting the time you took for the story) or you publish anyway knowing it's wrong, in which case, it's still a waste of time.
- giantrobot 4y agoOr you publish and report the claims made by the source and call out specifically where those claims couldn't be verified. It's like science publishing, too often negative results go unpublished. Knowing what didn't work can be as useful as knowing what did work.
- krisoft 4y ago> If you fact check and you're right, you've wasted your time. That is not how it works. First of all there is no “you’re right”. The journalist doesn’t have first hand observations. They cannot be “right” or “wrong” only their source can be. The journalist goes and checks what can be verified independently. No matter what the outcome of these checks nobody wasted their time. The result is a stronger article, and continued respect for the journalist in his profession.
- mannerheim 4y ago[flagged]
- ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago> If you fact check and you're right, you've wasted your time. I see it differently. I used to be a test engineer. My tests made it onto documentation accompanying a $50,000 RF snooper (in 1985), and were verifications that the item passed the test. I like it when tests don't fail.