Not in my wildest dreams did I ever think working as a journalist and now teaching Sports Journalism would ever be compared to a popular hamburger chain… But at the most recent Boston University Sports Journalism Seminar, that’s exactly what Chris Gasper of the Boston Globe did…”Like Burger King, you can have it your way”, said Gasper…
Do you give them what the want or do you give them what they need?
Fellow Globie Tara Sullivan put it succinctly, “Journalism in it’s purest form informs the public what it needs to know and now we find ourselves doing what they want to have.”
It was an interesting sidebar to the night’s intended journey…One we’ll try to explore as we finish up the semester…
But one thing journalists can’t “have their own way” is accuracy and credibility…there simply is no two ways about it…Either the readers/viewers believe you or not…And there’s no middle ground…This isn’t Major League Baseball where hitting safely three out of ten times gets you into the Hall of Fame…You need to bat a thousand…Ask Ron Borges, ask John Tomase…
A reporter is only as good as his/her information and the people who supply that information…Building that base takes time, takes hard work, takes skill…”appreciate them (athletes/sources) as three dimensional” Gasper told the students…”Don’t just talk to them when you need something”…
Which brings us to getting the story right and getting it first…Certainly we’d all like to do both but in these Twitter/Instagram/Facebook days of disseminating news, that’s just not the case…”The short term gain of breaking that story can be great but what if it’s wrong”, posed Gasper, “then people look at it and say , this is somebody who gets things consistently wrong as opposed to getting it consistently right and they’re less likely to trust you and confide in you.”
“What else can I tell you but that right is what matters”, added Sullivan, “I get the temptation and the rush and all that but being right is ultimately what matters so much more and the satisfaction of doing your job when you’re doing it right, trust me when I tell you the long term satisfaction of getting it right is far far deeper and stronger than getting getting it first.”
We work in a different journalism world now…the rules seem looser, the competition more keen…Young journalists are learning their way…Sources need to be cultivated and protected…But even Gasper acknowledged that when it comes down to deadline and given the choice between getting a second source and going with a story (to have it first), “we’re gonna run it”…That has to seem like such a contradiction…
Don’t give them what they want, give them what they need… Yet, if it means getting beat, give it to them first (and worry about the consequences later)…
That’s not exactly the “special order” journalism has in mind….
13 Comments
Elizabeth Pentikis posted on March 19, 2018 at 8:33 pm
https://goo.gl/hTCQdV
Ashleigh Shanley posted on March 20, 2018 at 2:07 pm
Sports journalism is no different from political, business or lifestyle journalism. All these fields are in a delicate state because of the recent criticism President Trump has directed towards the media. I believe because of his repetitive statements about ‘fake news,’ the irresponsibility of the media, and journalists who lie – all reporters need to be more accurate in their reporting.
Even with sports journalism, it is so critical that the field continues to practice journalistic ethics. Whether it is reducing the number of anonymous sources, giving balanced sides to a story, or fact checking sources – we still have the same responsibility of “being right” like every other journalist.
In my very first Art of the Interview class with Andrea Kramer, she closed class with one piece of advice. She told us that at the end of the semester, if we only came away with one thing she wanted us to know the importance of always being right over being first. In this industry, it takes so much time to build your reputation, develop your skills, and gain contacts. Yet, you can destroy your reputation and ruin your credibility in an instant.
“The long-term satisfaction of getting it right is far deeper and stronger than getting something first,” said our guest, Tara Sullivan of the Boston Globe.
While it is comforting to hear these well-known reporters speak about being right and practicing accuracy, the president’s belief that the media lies and spreads ‘fake news’ is somewhat true of social media. I believe social media is changing journalism mostly in a positive way with easy access to constant news, but I think there are negatives that come with the medium as well.
One of those being the ability to tweet or Instagram false news or information that is not complete, and then easily correct oneself without losing any credibility. I worry this is allowing journalists, particularly those that are very active on social media, to rush stories and be lazy about confirming information. And sometimes this can have a huge impact on someone’s life – particularly when journalists irresponsibly use anonymous sources.
One event that comes to mind is the Rolling Stone article about “Jackie” a girl who was allegedly sexually assaulted by members of a UVA fraternity. The reporter used an anonymous source as the main voice in the story, and she also kept the woman’s friends anonymous to “protect” the main source’s identity. Then, the reporter also did an incredibly poor job of fact checking what the anonymous sources said, and ended up publishing a false story that revealed the identity of some members of the fraternity.
This story goes hand in hand with the article about when to trust anonymous sources. While “Jackie’s” story was on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine – a legitimate outlet – the anonymous sources were still completely untrustworthy. This article suggested that trusting well known outlets and reporters who are respected is normally ok, this example supports their final statement that making case by case decisions about whether to trust anonymous sources in an article is the best and safest practice.
There are so many changes going on in journalism today – the shift towards multi-media work, the transition to releasing stories in parts, and an environment where journalists are seen as less trustworthy than in the past. However, these changes do not mean journalists can become less accurate with what they publish or be lazy about confirming sources and information.
Moving forward, even in sports journalism, it is very critical to be correct than to be first. Protecting your credibility helps to keep your sources, and as Chris Gasper of the Boston Globe said, if you get things right, they’ll trust and confide in you, and you’ll start to get it first.
Nicole Ericson posted on March 21, 2018 at 1:20 pm
There were multiple takeaways from this seminar that are important not only in the world of sports journalism, but also in the world of journalism as a whole. They were to be right over being first and that the job of journalism is not just about writing stories, but about building relationships.
With the way social media is changing the game, the line between being right and being first is blurred. Chris Gasper and Tara Sullivan touched on this point when they said that “if you hear a piece of news and you put it out on twitter and then it changes you can just put out another tweet instantly correcting yourself. If someone originally put that a player signed for four years, and it turns out it is two, you can simply say that the contract has been settled at two years in a separate tweet.” While social media allows journalists to inform the public in seconds, it is still important they get the facts right. Another good point both Gasper and Sullivan brought up was the idea of putting a story out in pieces. With the rise in use of social media it has allowed journalists to release information in parts. As information comes out, it is put on different platforms to gain the attention of the public. However, like before the information has to be accurate. It boosts their credibility. Sullivan even mentioned that the effects of being right are far greater than getting the information out first, and I agree with her. Being correct on a consistent basis will grow ones credibility and will hep that journalist in the long run. If someone is consistently correct it allows sources to trust the journalist with information, and trusts them to put the information out in the right light.
However, getting to this point is a long journey. Relationships must be built first. While some newbies may think they can walk into a locker room on day one and expect everyone to drop the dirty details, they are wrong. There has to be a balance of credibility and relationship building in this job. But having the people skills to do this is are hard to learn. Some people are naturally born with people skills and others aren’t. So, when it comes to your job and trying to get the story sometimes people forget that whoever they are interviewing is human to. By building relationships with players and coaches you gain a certain respect from them because it shows you are trying to go beyond your job and connect with them. Once the relationships are in place there will be a mutual understanding and trust between the two. Journalism is just as much building relationships as it is getting the facts. Like Gasper said “once you start getting it right, you will start getting it first.”
As sports journalism has evolved over the years, how you build credibility and relationships remains the same. As a journalist I’m looking forward to making new connections and getting the stories right, as I should. It is going to take time and a lot of effort as a new journalist, but it is time that is going to be worth it in the end. This seminar was important in teaching us the thin line between protecting sources, getting the information to the public and maintaining credibility. I will continue to practice what Gasper and Sullivan spoke about and I will work hard to build the necessary relationships to survive in this industry.
Taylor Ventrice posted on March 21, 2018 at 1:37 pm
As student journalists, we are taught in classes to find a source and then confirm that information with at least two other sources before we write the story. After speaking with Chris Gasper and Tara Sullivan, I learned that that’s not always the case.
Journalism today has drifted far away from “traditional journalism” with the influence of social media. Social media has become a way for journalists and people to report and receive news in an instant. With this comes the issue of how accurate news is. Journalist and reporters tend to want to be the first to break the story, but often forget to double check their sources and make sure the information they have gathered is correct. Granted, that’s not an issue in 2018 because a wrong tweet can be fixed immediately with another tweet. But, sometimes this could have a significant impact on the reporter’s credibility and the situation he or she is reporting on.
When Sullivan said, “long-term satisfaction of getting it right is far deeper and stronger than getting something first,” made me so happy and I related to her immediately. As a junior in college, I will be entering the “real world” in no time, and I want the work that I put out there to be correct. Accuracy is my number one thing and that is the way you build a solid reputation as a journalist.
As sports journalism continues to change over the years, being accurate will always be the most important. I believe there is no room for lazy reporters who take the easy way out.
Jessica Citronberg posted on March 21, 2018 at 3:46 pm
When I saw that we would be discussing sources last week, the first thing I thought of was anonymous sources and how they affect journalism. Anonymous sources are everywhere, and they’re being used a lot more in journalism today.
I’ve definitely noticed it when going on the street and interviewing people for classes. People will talk to you, but only if their name isn’t listed.
But when Chris Gasper and Tara Sullivan from the Globe started talking about sources, we took a bit of a different turn.
We started talking about how they develop their sources through the years. Tara is relatively new at the Globe, so it was interesting to hear from her about how she has developed her sources after coming from a New Jersey market.
Sources should be treated as humans, not just people who help you with you jobs. I’m a Campus Manger for University Tees, a custom apparel company, and I deal with that idea on a daily basis. When I communicate with a customer, it’s not just about the business that we’re doing. I always start out with “Happy Monday!” or “Hope you’re having a great day!” because it’s important for a customer to see that they’re more than just money.
Sources are more than just a story, and making them feel like they’re humans is just as important as writing a story. If you don’t have a source who is comfortable with you, you won’t have a story to write in the first place. Having a comfortable source is half the job of being a sports writer.
Another really important part, is having the right story. A big part of the discussion last week was about getting the story out first vs. getting it out right. It’s a tough line, and it often needs to be drawn in sports journalism today.
People break news on Twitter. Chris and Tara were talking about how stories are now just mini updates of a story. Tom Brady had a cut on his hand, and that was the whole story. Another one came later with updates on how it happened, and another came with an update on whether or not he would be sitting out that Sunday.
Before Twitter and social media, that could’ve just been one story. There’s a lot of pressure to break news all the time. And now, there’s a lot more pressure to break news that’s accurate. There’s always discussions of fake news going on, and it’s up to journalists to not be part helping it flourish.
But then again, it’s hard when you want to break news, but you might not have all of the necessary information. Chris was talking about how he used to call both sides of a story before publishing. Now, there isn’t always time for that.
Overall, I learned a lot more than I thought we would’ve discussed last week. But as always, I’m very grateful to have discussed these important issues with Chris and Tara.
Jane Rose posted on March 21, 2018 at 3:49 pm
In a world of looking down at our phones and computers, people skills are hard to come by nowadays. I often see children barely walking who already have a tablet of some kind in their hand, and I question their people skills in the future.
And though communication is important in all careers, in journalism this is especially true. Being able to communicate effectively with sources is the skill that can really determine the path your career takes.
While I obviously believe my love of sports and writing brought me to journalism, I actually credit a lot of it to being raised in my mother’s bar/restaurant. From a young age, I was told what customers to go up to and learned to carry on conversations with them. I was often told “I feel like I’m talking to my best friend, not an eight year old.” I consider myself fortunate to have these people skills.
So hearing one of this week’s speakers, Chris Gasper, touch on the importance of relating to people, made me feel even more validated in my career choice. And while I’m aware that this week’s focus was on sources, this concept of people skills is what stands out to me. Maybe that’s because I know many people who want to be sports writers because they aren’t as good with people and that comes across on camera. And while that sounds logical at first, the more thought I give to it, the more I realize that a journalist of any kind should be able to communicate with subjects, not just those who plan to be seen while reporting on it. I guess I’m now wondering how these awkward print people are going to be effective.
Tara Sullivan, our other speaker, mentioned another relationship key that I have already put into practice, as painful as it might be— not just contacting a source when you need something. Nobody wants to feel used, even if they are making millions upon millions of dollars. I never want to ‘annoy’ anyone (though my roommate Jessica might disagree) so contacting a source when I don’t need anything genuinely stresses me out. But I’ve noticed that it goes a long way. Because I had forged a professional relationship with him, I was able to call a state representative after 10 p.m. once when I was in dire need of a quote. He was happy to help me. It’s times like these that I see how connecting on a person-to-person level pays off.
I think the biggest takeaway from this week’s seminar is to treat sources like the people they are, not just a part of the job. And sometimes it can be difficult to differentiate the two. Talk to them about subjects other then what you need quotes for — their families, friends or any other passions they have. As Amy Lawrence said last week, there is more to life than just sports after all. While the brutal honesty of saying “I’m not an expert” to a source may be daunting, Chris can attest to how this might just work in your favor. We’re journalists, but we’re humans first.
Matthew Doherty posted on March 21, 2018 at 4:30 pm
I was fortunate that Thursday’s seminar lined up perfectly with my presentation on the ethics of social media for another class of mine on Monday.
Chris and Tara both touched upon the conundrum of “getting it right” or “getting it first”. The logical answer is “getting it right” but in today’s world of social media, more and more journalists aren’t focusing on validity but on quickness. Chris and Tara acknowledged it’s more important to get it right, but then contradicted themselves by saying that the Globe will run with a breaking news story with just one source. Interesting… So which one is it?
I was able to use this issue on Monday in my presentation for Media Law and Ethics on the ethical problems for journalists on social media. I raised the hypothetical to my classmates and it stimulated an interesting back-and-forth discussion. The whole class agreed this is a major problem with social media and that it is way more important to get it right because one mistake on social media can ruin a career.
I think 99% of professional journalists would agree with that statement but the problem with social media is that it invites breaking news. For the first time ever, journalists have the platform to break news instantaneously. Breaking news can help a journalist tremendously in their career. So that temptation is always there… and that’s a major problem.
However, most of the time, you can be “right” and “quick” as long as you have good sources. And that brings us to the other major portion of Thursday’s seminar; building a relationship with your sources. It’s so crucial, especially in today’s world of social media.
Similar to earlier guests in the seminar, Chris and Tara emphasized the importance of relating to athletes and building a relationship with them.
It’s a two-way street and you can’t just talk to a source whenever you want something. It’s crucial to ask them questions about their life and show that you care for them.
Basically, show them that they are more than a “source” to you.
I think building relationships with sources is the most important thing as a journalist. Unfortunately, you can’t teach that and it’s hard for me as a college student to work on that. I’ve covered BU basketball for three years and I have a good relationship with the coach, but the college level prevents you from building those relationships with players. It takes an arm and a leg from the SID to even get a player for a postgame interview.
So when I get my first job as a journalists, I know creating relationships with sources will be the hardest thing for me. And with the world of social media, it will be the most important too.
Matt Dresens posted on March 21, 2018 at 5:20 pm
Last week’s sourcing talk was definitely one of the stronger seminars we have had thus far. It also reminded me a lot of things that we have talked about in past classes.
For one, Tara really made me realize that your reporting and journalist skills come in far more handy than knowing the inside outs of X’s and O’s. Her story on how she gathered information on the Seton Hall story is how any other news person would cover a “real” news story. Sports Journalists have to be true, hard noes reporters first and sports-centric second. t doesn’t mater if you are on a sports beat or a cop beat, the news gathering process doesn’t change.
As Chris outlined when he used to cover high school sports, simple stats and player identification can be difficult at lower level sports. I know from my limited time covering high school sports in high school, these were similar issues I ran into. Through these challenges, you become a stronger journalist. You pay attention to the game more. I think once you can prove you can cover sports without media assistants handing you stat packets at the end of each quarter, you will find that you are a better journalist in the long run.
I know I felt much, much more confident in the BU press box covering games in comparison to high school sports. Another point Gasper made on the high school aspect was the willingness to talk from players. This can be the one advantage to the reporters in the high school game.
Another topic that Tara and Chris hit on was “being your own brand.” Like many others have said, they both echoed the idea of being yourself. This, for me, goes way past being a good journalist. If you are yourself and not trying to be something you are not, you will do well. I don’t care if it’s journalism or life in general if you try and be something you are not, it’s not going to go well. People are going to see right through the act. Be genuine. Be real. Work hard and be yourself and I think you will be able to stand out on that alone.
I think that’s exactly what both of these guests did. Gasper is the best example of this. He goes on every week with Felger and Mazz and just does his thing. He’s not trying to throw “hot takes” against the wall in hope that one sticks. He’s presenting facts and making strong arguments and commentary that provides some much-needed balance to the show.
All in all, the seminar really reiterated one thing for me. You are a journalist first and a sports person second. Anyone who takes that advice, I think will prove to be a very strong sports journalist. Its the story and the details that sell papers. Not that final score. I think its pretty obvious as to why this topic “matters” to the class.
Laura Guerriero posted on March 21, 2018 at 10:42 pm
It’s a marathon, not a sprint.
If I had to sum up this past week’s seminar in one sentence, it would be that. The news is so immediate in 2018. The dozens of social media platforms allow anyone to break a story at any point. The rush to break the story first also ushers in an uptick in the number of inaccuracies that are reported.
When it comes to hearing what professors have to say about the state of journalism, there is a mixed bag of responses to handling a potential breaking story. Sure, accuracy is always paramount, but do you report in pieces as the story comes in, take a risk and report what you have before being 110% sure, or do you wait until you have all of the information you need and are absolutely certain the story will be accurate?
You can never seem to get a definitive answer to this question. It’s always something along the lines of “well, it depends on the situation, but just make sure you’re not wrong.” Well, that’s really reassuring to a future journalist…
All of this talk of having to break a story first as often as possible and still be accurate every time (because keep in mind, your career is on the line) stressed me out. How would I make it in journalism without being the first every time?
Hearing Tara Sullivan say “I’m not known for breaking stories” brought everything back down to Earth for me. You don’t have to be the journalist to break every story in order to make a successful career for yourself.
This brings me to another major takeaway I had from this seminar: your career is not worth the fifteen seconds of fame you could gain from being the one to break the (inaccurate) story first. At the end of the day, a journalist’s career is based on their ability to tell the truth. If you’re known as the one that has a tendency to spread false news, you’re not going to get very far.
The opening line ties into the sources you use as well. If you want to gain rapport with your sources, you need to take the time to develop those relationships. No one likes feeling used, and while athletes, coaches, etc. understand that it is your job to talk to them and report on it, you will yield better results if you treat your sources like they are more than just your sources. We all know we would be more willing to talk to a person we have a good relationship with than a stranger that does not take the time to get to know you.
The final takeaway that I had from this seminar was that, while yes, there can be competition among journalists, that’s not always the case. Hearing Gasper and Sullivan joke and talk about how there are enough stories for everyone helped remind me that the world of journalism isn’t this 24/7 bloodbath. After all, we are still human inside.
Andrew Mason posted on March 21, 2018 at 11:51 pm
Hold the Pickles, Hold the Lettuce…
“It’s better to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.”
The above quote is one of the fundamental ideologies that I have learned in my time studying and practicing journalism at Boston University. As journalists it’s pivotal to be “diggers”, go that extra step, reach out to that other source, or even cross that police tape to snap that perfect picture of the crime scene. However, as touched on in last Thursday’s Sports Seminar class, when it comes to screwing up by sharing inaccurate information, there is no such thing as “asking for forgiveness”. Mess up once and you could very well be done in this business forever.
In 2018, people expect information to be immediate. LeBron James gets injured? I want to know seconds after he goes down. A top high school hockey player commits to BU? I want to know now. I’m guilty of this, you’re guilty of this. Unfortunately, what this phenomenon (created large in part by the rise of social media apps like Twitter) has done, is place an exceptional amount of pressure on today’s sports journalist. As a sports lover, I love the thrill of competition. But as a journalist, the race to be the first to break stories gives me anxiety, because my audience wants the news before it has fully developed. And when this happens, the chances of making an error with accuracy increases exponentially.
Just last week, Black Sports Online reported that New York Giants star Odell Beckham Jr. was caught amid a brutal bar fight in Atlanta. BSO’s original story used just one source: “a bottle girl at the Gold Room confirms Beckham was there.” With a high profile athlete like Beckham, only a week after his recent cocaine scandal surfaced, the temptation to be the first to leak this story was as high as the sky. Nevertheless, the story ended up being fake – Beckham was not even in the city of Atlanta that night. As students of the craft, we have to remember that journalism at its core is all about telling people the TRUTH. In a perfect world, it would be mandatory to talk to another source and confirm key details of a story, even if it takes longer to publish. But the reality is, one-sourced material is very prevalent today.
Getting close to sources has placed me in some of the most interesting relationships in my life. As a writer for WTBU Sports here at BU, covering field hockey and women’s basketball, I think I have done a great job on my beats. My biggest journalism fault, I will admit, is that I perhaps have gotten too close to my sources. As the nature of college goes, people in their early 20’s are bound to become friends with other people in their early 20’s. The field hockey and basketball players that I report on are peers that I see in the dining hall, in the classroom, and even on the weekends. I understand that as student journalists we have slightly looser restrictions than paid professionals when it comes to these sorts of things, but Tara Sullivan of the Boston Globe said it straight and simply on Thursday:
“I am friendly with my sources, yes, but I would certainly never become good friends with a source.”
Contrary to what I assumed would happen, since becoming friends with the athletes and coaches here at BU, I believe I have actually become more critical of the teams on my beats than ever before. I guess it’s kind of like having a sibling: you can be one of their biggest fans while being one their biggest critics. For example, here is a small excerpt from my column-style midseason report on BU’s women’s basketball team from earlier this year:
“This team receives a C+ because they can do more. They are much better at this point in the season than in the last three years, but settling for just better than before is not good enough.”
I’ll be completely honest here. If I didn’t know the players and the coaches on this team outside of the typical journalist-source relationship, I don’t think I would have had the guts to grade them so poorly. Of course, it’s crucial to develop stable relationships with sources. After all, the Boston Globe’s Chris Gasper said so much of holding onto sources is just basic people skills. But, a major component of telling audiences the pure truth is refraining from being biased in any way. In the future, I’m sure I will be covering the level of sports where the athlete isn’t so accessible and eager to be your friend outside of the locker room. For instance, no matter how fun of a guy I may be, it’s unlikely that Kyrie Irving will be trying to go to T’s Pub with me after a game. What I’m trying to say is, it seems that a natural barrier between the personal lives of both the athlete and the journalist forms as the level of skill of the sport increases.
Lastly, as a journalist you want to make sure that your source doesn’t think that you are simply using them to finish a story. Showing up, getting a quote, then leaving will not do the trick. Even something as simple as asking Jayson Tatum how his son, “Deuce”, is doing, or in a student journalist’s case, just saying “hello” to athletes when you see them around campus, can go a long way.
When you show recognition that athletes are human beings too, sources will be more likely to help you out.
Jacqui Manning posted on March 22, 2018 at 1:25 am
It’s hard to teach a field job in an academic environment.
Let me rephrase that– It’s hard to teach a field job in an academic environment, but it’s nearly IMPOSSIBLE to teach journalism in an academic environment. And that’s because there’s really not a way to teach students how to adapt to an ever-changing, constantly evolving, profession that has no set direction for it’s future. This is the theme I want to discuss in this weeks blog post, because I picked up multiple lessons through last week’s speakers that reminded me just how different the journalism field can be from the classroom.
While I am not going into this field, and I have many critical opinions about how things are done, there is so much to admire from journalists. It really is a thankless job. No matter what you do, you can’t win. Chris reminded me of this when he talked about the balance between being friendly with your sources/ athletes, and doing your job. It’s a hard line to ask someone how an athletes family is doing, and then write a bad column on them the next day. Or, maybe a source gives you some information and then you write an negative with that information.
Until you’re in the exact position of balancing relationships with sources, it’s hard to say how you, as an individual person, will handle it. Chris and Tara provided some insightful tips, such as “the job comes first no matter what, and at the end of the day if you make that clear athletes will respect you for it,” but that had me thinking… “if the job comes first, why do all of these journalists working on the Patriots beat let Bill Belichick control the news the way he does?”
This is where the no-win circumstance comes back to my mind. At the end of the day, journalists are going to do what they can do to inform the public. It’s easy criticize journalists for putting up with Belichick’s un-democratic, anti-freedom of the press-like control mechanisms. It’s easy to say, “fight back, he can’t lose all of you!” And then I think, “well, if they did that, then all coverage would be gone and we would have no access to the Patriots organization.”
I have no doubt in my mind that Belichick would shut off all media contact if he could, just like I have no doubt in my mind that journalists would love to all strike and oppose Belichick’s control tendencies. At the end of the day though, just like when working with sources and athletes, you have to find the balance so both parties can do their job. It’s not a perfect sytem–but its the one we got, and there is not other place in the world with a free press like ours.
Now, on the theme of balance, as soon in journalistic relationships with players, agents, organizations, and sources, I think another balance has to do with adapting to a changing profession on a daily basis. Something that kept sticking with me about Tara was how much she said she didn’t like social media. She uses it, but would much rather write and do print. Tara even said she is a dinosaur, and her work is outdated with the use of twitter. I think that while we all wish that wasn’t the case– Twitter and social media is just a reality of the journalism profession staying updated and relevant. One thing that concerns me; however, is a fear or losing the old practices taught in a print newsroom. Things such as multiple sources and fact checking sometimes get pushed aside by the 24/7 news cycle of twitter. Everyone wants to get the story out first. Yesterday, I found out that Matthew Slater was coming back to the Patriots through Tedy Bruschi’s instagram. With this competition comes a want and a need to make sloppy mistakes. Both Chris and Tara said that its almost “okay” for journalists to make mistakes because they can just replace a tweet five minutes later. My biggest fear about this is columnists, beat reporters, and anchors listening to the wrong sources and ultimately ruining relationships with teams and the sources that help us gain access to the sports world.
Incorrect, cat-fish-like sources happen all the time. So I ask again? Can you really teach how to prevent this? I don’t know if there’s a correct answer, but I think that through enough experience, there should always be a conscious effort to maintain journalistic integrity.
All of the questions have to do with why I think journalism is an impossible subject to teach inside a classroom. None of these questions can be directly answered until a reporter is out on the field, learning by trial and error, experience, and instinct.
Alanna McDonough-Rice posted on March 22, 2018 at 10:06 am
Would you rather be right, safe, and later or break news and risk being wrong? That was the question left to be answered.
Chris Gasper and Tara Sullivan were both on the side of being accurate and right each and every time instead of risking it.
Sullivan said she was not known for breaking news, but she was always known for being incredibly accurate. In a world filled with fake news, accuracy is critical to making sure the public knows your work is always correct and consistently putting out accurate work. Many people don’t trust the media after seeing little errors in spelling, because if they can’t spell properly they start to question what else may be inaccurate in the article. Being on the side of accuracy may not win you a spot as the number one news breaker, but it does ensure your reputation remains intact.
Gasper has experiences with reputable sources who turned out to be wrong and fellow journalists being less than ethical, but he always tried to aim for accuracy. If he’s consistently getting stories wrong, who will trust him with interviews or with their story?
While both were focused on accuracy, they admitted that they will run stories if the choice is between “run it” and “get a second choice.” People want their news and they want it fast, free, and accurate, which is a challenge we face as journalists. How do we find stories, get the full picture, and do it before everyone else?
The biggest takeaway from this conversation for me was to stay away from the temptation to be first. It is better to be second and completely fair and accurate than to botch a story or misrepresent a situation. In a fake news society, we need to be a voice for truth and focus on telling the truth and not on being the first to break news.
Shane Rhodes posted on March 22, 2018 at 6:19 pm
I felt conflicted after this seminar.
Our entire academic career, we, as prospective journalists, have always been taught to confirm any speculative information with separate sources. It serves as failsafe, should the info we receive be false or misleading.
Modern journalism has drifted away from this, however. With technology progressing to the point where we can communicate with almost anyone around the world at any point in time, reporters feel the need to get news to their audience as soon as possible, whether it’s right or not. Accuracy is almost completely thrown out the window for some sort of instant gratification or the necessity to “be first,” which I think is totally bogus. I’d rather write a story/post that is well thought out wholly accurate over one that seems rushed and not worth people’s time simply for the sake of being first to a story.
Also, it feels as if there is little to no consequence or accountability (save for situations like Ron Borges’) by journalists either. This is no longer printed word on the page, mistakes or inaccuracies can be changed by simply sending another tweet or editing a post on Facebook or some other website. This is partly why there is so much distrust in the media today and why things like this need to change.
As for sourcing and building relationships with people you can gain information from, I saw a very similar theme that we have gone over in many other seminars: these athletes, or any other potential “sources,” are people too. If you keep things real and honest with them, treat them like people, they’ll be more inclined to help you out when they can. You can’t treat them like machines that spit out information — ask about their personal lives or their family from time to time to know that you are someone they can trust (to a degree, anyway… you can’t get too comfortable or friendly because you can get caught in a situation where you are unable to accurately judge someone or something and risk losing access).