Making Better Journalists

In a world where social media sites are taking over traditional forms of communication, journalists have no use but to use them to their advantage.

According to Mashable's Brenna Ehrlic, there are seven major ways journalists are using Facebook and Twitter to enhance their stories or careers.

Journalists can use Twitter to find out potential stories from independent sources before other corporations would discover them. Besides finding these leads, journalists can also use Twitter to follow trends by noticing popular hashtags.

Another way social media sites are beneficial to journalists is the number of sources it provides. Facebook can connect someone to over 400 million people across the world. Twitter also makes sources more accessible.

A fourth way journalists are using social media to enhance their stories is through crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing allows the public to contribute to stories via quotes, different perspectives, and through photos and video.

Twitter and Facebook have also been helpful in producing journalists. Through Twitter, people who may never have had the chance to voice their opinions, now have a platform that is specifically for it.

A sixth way journalists use Facebook and Twitter to enhance their work is by sharing it. Journalists are able to get feedback by posting their content on social networks and allowing readers to leave comments and suggestions.

Perhaps one of the most effective ways journalists can use social media sites to enhance their careers is by promoting themselves. Through Twitter, aspiring journalists can create their personal brand, connect to their community and promote their work to any audience.

A last reason Ehrlic believes social networks are beneficial to journalists is because it allows journalists to truly embrace the possibilities and use them to move forward in their work. By adapting to the newest technology and fads, journalists are able to appeal to wider audiences, which in turn enhances the overall experience of journalism.

Read more...

Should Viewers Be Fact-Checkers?

In the Washington Monthly, an article by Steve Benen deals with TV fact-checking.

"One of the Sunday shows invites a high-profile guest to discuss current events. The guest responds to pointed questions, and makes a variety of claims and arguments. Some of those claims and arguments will be accurate, and some won't. For the news consumer watching at home, the information gleaned from the interview is only useful if he/she knows whether the guest's comments are factual."

"With that in mind, the Sunday shows have a couple of choices. First, hosts can become knowledgeable about the subject matter and fact-check the guests' claims during the program. Second, the shows can partner with independent fact-checkers like This Week has done with PolitiFact. Or third, some combination of the two."

When these concepts were introduced to David Gregory, host of NBC's Meet the Press, he responded that it was an "interesting idea," but not one the NBC show will be emulating. "People can fact-check Meet the Press every week on their own terms."

Benen poses this: "'Gregory's comments suggest a more traditional approach: let viewers figure things out on their own terms. Why separate fact from fiction for news consumers when they can do that on their own?'"

I have always trusted in the media to tell the truth, but on these talks shows how is that possible if the guest doesn't answer questions truthfully?

I certainly don't have the time or interest in becoming a fact-checker.

Should independent fact-checkers be hired to do the work?

Should programs check facts during their broadcasts, or is that even possible?

Read more...