Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Are news publishers directly liable for embedding tweets that contain images not created by that tweeter?
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
July 9, 2013, 12:31 p.m.
LINK: panpa.org.au  ➚   |   Posted by: Joshua Benton   |   July 9, 2013

Miss the endless debates in the U.S. last year over the rise of fact-checking sites? Well, move to Australia, where the debates are apparently just starting in earnest. Politifact Australia, the U.S. site’s first international affiliate, launched in May, and newspaper veteran Ian Moore doesn’t much like it:

In essence, sites such as these are not a journalistic enterprise, nor a resource. They are out to cut the lunch of established publishers with cheap grabs. This is as far from real journalism as practised by newspaper masthead publishers as it gets. It is the job of journalists to establish facts and break news, not indulge in needless semantics.

Another fact-checking enterprise is about to be launched by the ABC [Australian Broadcasting Corporation], with $10 million of taxpayers’ money. The broadcaster is currently hiring staff for a unit that will check the factual basis of statements by politicians and other public figures, while generating content. Its work seems to be mainly internal, but an ABC spokesperson says the unit will have its own web page.

Now that is a frightening prospect — groupthink not only being accepted by the national broadcaster, but is being made compulsory. It does little to support the contention of independent journalism.

If there is improvement to be made to journalism standards, it won’t be achieved by caucusing on interpretation of facts. It would be far better to encourage better use of the journalist’s stock-in-trade — words and language. Standards have lapsed in recent years as a result of inattention to the teaching of basic grammar and proper vocabulary in our schools.

Now who will be the Rachel Maddow of Australia?

Show tags Show comments / Leave a comment
 
Join the 45,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Are news publishers directly liable for embedding tweets that contain images not created by that tweeter?
A New York federal judge ruled that when publishers from The Boston Globe to Vox Media to Breitbart “caused the embedded tweets to appear on their websites, their actions violated plaintiff’s exclusive display right.”
What strategies work best for increasing trust in local newsrooms? Trusting News has some ideas
“It’s not so much about gaming Facebook’s algorithm or working with the Facebook changes as much as it is taking advantage of Facebook as a truly social platform.”
Should we consider fake news another form of (not particularly effective) political persuasion — or something more dangerous?
Plus: The lines between “fake news” and psyops, the Russians shared real news too, and “reality apathy.”