(C) Daily Montanan This story was originally published by Daily Montanan and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . About the news that isn't quite fit to print – Daily Montanan [1] ['More From Author', 'November', 'Darrell Ehrlick'] Date: 2022-11-03 For a moment, let’s talk about the news that isn’t fit to print (a category that seems to be shrinking in the age of social media where everything from what someone had for breakfast to conspiracies of Satanic cabals seems to be grist for the electronic ecosphere). I’ll be straight: I have my doubts that even explaining what journalists do to folks already reading a news site has any salutary effect. The conversation about how the media works probably needs to be held among those who don’t trust the media, have tuned out, or those who have traded the media for conspiracy. But journalists, myself likely included, sometimes don’t always explain what we do, or why we do it. Take for example, a tidbit that was churning in the rumor mill that is Twitter. It involved some public employees and campaign donations (I’m being deliberately vague for several reasons which – stick with me – will hopefully be obvious in a moment.) However, when Montana media hadn’t gobbled up the tip, we were briefly inundated by some who either accused us of conspiracy or laziness. The truth isn’t quite as sexy. Instead, we saw the same tweets that most of the Twitterati had seen. But instead of being reflexively outraged, we checked in with experts in campaign finance law, including the office of the Commissioner of Political Practices, the state’s highest authority on the matter. What the tweet described was not contrary to any law, and even if the information was inaccurate, it was likely an error made by the campaign, but something considered – at most – clerical. There could be no fines and no violation of policy. So, we did what any responsible media would do: Ran the information down and determined it didn’t rise to the level of newsworthiness. Even more than that, though, we determined that even reporting the specifics would only seem to implicate the state employees by casting suspicion upon what was otherwise a legal activity. Put another way, it would be like running a story or list of people under the headline: “These people proven not to be perverts.” Simply linking them with that headline would likely tarnish their reputation by mere association, suggesting that they had been under some kind of suspicion in the first place. This recent minor incident is a great example of what we do several times a week, if not daily. We hear pieces of information and rumor and go to the source, verifying information along the way, and then reporting on it after vetting. However, oftentimes when the tidbits turn out to be unsubstantiated or flat-out wrong, we simply stop. We don’t run collections of all the things we did during our day or week that turn out to be wrong, out of context, or normal. This isn’t anything new, though. We’ve always treated news like this. What has changed is the rapid echo chamber of social media that accelerates these tidbits and rumors so that before the information can be verified, it’s already taken as truth. Often, our silence by not reporting becomes the basis of some conspiracy theory – again, not something that is new to the news industry, but nonetheless given credibility through baseless speculation on social media. It’s a classic Catch-22 for us: If we report rumor, we’re derelict in our professional obligation. If we don’t, we’re part of a cover-up. What I hope folks remember is the nature of news and this ever-evolving news business. You can trust that, even in the day of social media and instantaneous information, if a rumor is true or has a credible base, some industrious and clever reporter will likely find time to break the story. Competition in this business still exists, even if for nothing more than a bit of self satisfaction. What journalists print or broadcast is often just a fraction of what they’ve heard or know. Yet, not everything is true. And even truth requires context. And once that context is fully explained, often those “news items” become nothing more than political mirages – an appearance of something real on the horizon that doesn’t exist. It’s a difficult thing to ask of readers who are so accustomed to conspiracy and outrage, so this is a big ask: If you can’t seem to trust journalists for what they print, maybe consider trusting them for what doesn’t make the cut. [END] --- [1] Url: https://dailymontanan.com/2022/11/03/about-the-news-that-isnt-quite-fit-to-print/ Published and (C) by Daily Montanan Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/montanan/