Study: The Effect of watching CNN instead of Fox News

[Mendel]

i actually do not give credit for corrections (unless published within maybe 2 hours). people rarely go back and reread articles they have already read.

To me, corrections indicate that an organisation cares about publishing truth; lack of corrections indicate a lack of care. Everyone makes mistakes now and then, that's unavoidable in a deadline-driven business such as news reporting. How the news organisations deal with them matters. Printing corrections suggests a higher standard of care to ensure that corrections won't be necessary in the first place.

 

[NoParty]

To me, corrections indicate that an organisation cares about publishing truth; lack of corrections indicate a lack of care. Everyone makes mistakes now and then, that's unavoidable in a deadline-driven business such as news reporting. How the news organisations deal with them matters. Printing corrections suggests a higher standard of care to ensure that corrections won't be necessary in the first place.

I mostly agree with the "lack of care" part...but sadly we also have sources out there
that realize that they can grind their political axe by letting their untruth remain...indefinitely.

Good sources both work hard to get the facts right in the first place, and then, when they do get
something wrong, move to correct it as soon as the error is spotted...hopefully by themselves.
This will earn them respect from thinking people...and ridicule from the dumber.

 

[Mendel]

I mostly agree with the "lack of care" part...but sadly we also have sources out there
that realize that they can grind their political axe by letting their untruth remain...indefinitely.

Yes. My use of "lack of care" means "lack of care for the truth"; those who do not care for truth care for other things, like political influence or their bottom line (or both).

If I wanted to learn the truth, why would I turn to them?

 

[deirdre]

To me, corrections indicate that an organisation cares about publishing truth;

obviously late corrections are better than no corrections.

Everyone makes mistakes now and then,

Can you give a number for " now and then" that would be acceptable?
You said if they lied (or were wrong, i assume) 25% of the time you would ditch them. I assume it is not 25% need corrections also?

 

[Mendel]

Can you give a number for " now and then" that would be acceptable?

No. Because it also depends on how impactful the errors are.

One error per page feels like it'd be ok for a newspaper, one headline error per page is concerning.
A headline oversimplification isn't that bad if the article gets it right. Etc.

My criterium isn't how many errors, it's whether the news organisation strives to get their facts right. You'll have noticed that on Metabunk, I typically quote from sources high on the AdFontes chart.

 

[deirdre]

One error per page feels like it'd be ok for a newspaper

well we are talking about factual mistakes. so 1 per page? you are much more lenient than i am