CNN should be cautious in breaking “news”
UPDATE
Some links of interest:
END UPDATE
As the so-called “Balloon Boy” saga now unfolds as a confirmed hoax, I’m struck by the breaking news text messages I received from CNN Thursday when the network — and let’s be fair, much of the world — thought 6-year-old Falcon Heene was thousands of feet above Colorado in a flying balloon.
V.CNN BREAKING A 6-year-old climbed into a balloon-like experimental aircraft built by his parents and floated into the Colorado sky.
I noted that much of the world probably thought, too, that Falcon was in the balloon, but I suggest that the notion was only furthered by the nonstop coverage by networks like CNN. That’s not really my point, though.
CNN’s original text message didn’t use any phrases like “reportedly,” “apparently,” “thought to be,” or even “likely.” It stated the situation as fact.
When the craft later touched down in a field miles from the Heene’s home, CNN sent out this message:
V.CNN BREAKING A balloon-like experimental aircraft thought be [sic] carrying a 6-year-old Colorado boy has landed.
Here, they brought in (or attempted to, excusing their mistake) the phrase “thought to be.”
In examining CNN’s text messages, I think it’s important also to take a look at some of CNN’s other recent SMS’s. Most have been about things that can plainly be seen or do not necessarily need source verification — the Olympics going to Rio de Janeiro, NASA crashing a spacecraft into the moon, etc.
But other times, CNN provided appropriate attribution:
V.CNN BREAKING At least 1,100 peopled have died in Indonesia after two large earthquakes in as many days, U.N. humanitarian chief says.
This method should be used over their “Balloon Boy” approach, if for no other reason than to protect their own necks. If, after further verification, it turns out that the number was actually 4,000 people, CNN can then say, “Well, this is what an official source with knowledge of the situation was telling us.” But in the first method, CNN is providing the information as a statement of fact. The boy has floated into the Colorado sky.
You’ll remember that CNN received criticism for jumping the gun (no pun intended) when they erroneously reported that shots had been fired by the Coast Guard on the Potomac, when in fact the entire situation was a training exercise.
There, too, CNN began reporting by saying that, “Coast Guard fires 10 rounds at boat on Potomac River.” All it would have taken to be safe in that situation would have been to add in “reportedly” before “fires.”
Several other media outlets overdid their coverage of the “Balloon Boy” incident, and may have equally misstated the facts. I only receive CNN’s text messages and e-mails, though, so I only have a hard record of what they released. In researching this post, I did find similar overstatements:
- The Associated Press’ raw video on YouTube reported that a boy, “climbed into a hot-air balloon aircraft and floated away.”
- Fox News reported: “6-year-old boy trapped alone inside balloon.”
- msnbc.com’s live feed from 9News in Denver said, “Homemade aircraft floats away with boy.”
Most of the networks updated their information eventually when word came in that Falcon was not on the craft, but that doesn’t change the fact that they reported news that simply was not true.
I use CNN as the main example because I know of at least one specific situation where they’ve misreported news before (see the Coast Guard story). But no doubt here many news outlets were too quick to report something that eventually turned out to be false.
News organizations need to be careful not to take reports of news at face value, if not to protect viewers and readers from inaccurate information, then to protect themselves from embarrassment.
Newspaper photog loses First Amendment claim
An Oakland Tribune photographer arrested while taking pictures at the scene of a car accident losts his lawsuit against the City of Oakland Tuesday, and I agree with the judgement.
According to court papers:
Plaintiff is a staff photographer for the Oakland Tribune. On May 4, 2007, he was driving northbound on highway 880 when traffic in all four lanes came to a complete stop. He observed one car stopped in front of him, an overturned car, and a woman on the ground. Plaintiff exited his stopped car and approached the scene. He observed that the overturned vehicle was blocking lanes 1 and 2. He also observed the occupants of at least six other cars exit their vehicles.
Plaintiff wore his press pass lanyard around his neck and placed his press parking pass issued by the Oakland Police Department in the windshield of his car. He began taking photographs of the scene for the Tribune.
Then, according to the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press:
Oakland police officer Kevin Reynolds told him to leave the scene, even after Chavez, who was wearing a press pass, claimed he had a right to be there.
When Chavez began taking pictures of an ambulance that had arrived, Reynolds blocked his lens and started writing a citation. When Chavez then began photographing the arrival of a California Highway Patrol car, Reynolds grabbed his camera and said, “That’s it. You’re under arrest. You don’t need to take these kinds of pictures.”
Chavez was handcuffed and seated at the accident scene for a half-hour. He said drivers who assumed he was responsible for the wreck cursed at him as they passed. When he was finally cited and released, Reynolds said, “Don’t ever come here again to take these kind [of] photos.”
U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer ruled in part that Chavez:
does not offer any evidence that suggests that the general public had a right to exit their vehicles on the freeway and stand in the freeway to take photographs.
And I agree, sort of. Chavez should have pulled off to the side, out of the way of emergency vehicles, (later in court papers, the prosecution argued Chavez’s car blocked a fire truck) and parked with his hazard lights on.
I certainly believe Chavez had a First Amendment right to be there. But he was inappropriate in leaving his car parked in the middle of a freeway, even if he thought traffic wasn’t moving. He should have pulled off to the side, away from the accident.
In Virginia, there are certain specific, albeit limited, exemptions for the press when it comes to stopping near an emergency. But as a journalist, we still need to be responsible to stay out of the way of traffic and emergency vehicles – and be aware of how we’re going to get out of the area once we’re done.
How Twitter can help break news
A 3.0 magnitude earthquake sent tremors throughout the Roanoke Valley early Saturday morning, and the first people to report it were those posting tweets on the micro-blogging site Twitter.
It’s no secret that Twitter can be a great tool for journalists. In fact, I remember reading a blog entry about two years ago by technology evangelist Rob Scoble about a similar situation in Mexico. He wrote:
How did I find out about the Mexico City Earthquake? On Twitter. As soon as people started reporting it on Twitter, I looked at the USGS maps. The Twitterers beat the USGS by several minutes.
That’s exactly what I found here in Roanoke Saturday. When I was awoken by a combination of vibrations and a loud noise – and after I checked the house to make sure everything was okay – I immediately checked Twitter, by using search.twitter.com for the two keywords “earthquake” and “Roanoke”. Within five minutes of the shaking, people were tweeting.
santoroski (4:13 a.m.): Just got woken up by a giant boom in Roanoke. Wonder what it was.
mcgheeiv (4:16 a.m.): is looking for information about the earthquake in Roanoke.
pacarrell (4:18 a.m.): Seismic activity in Roanoke, Va? Earthquake? Just a shiver? Yes, Virginia, the earth moved for me, too.
With anecdotal confirmation that others had experienced what I did — that it wasn’t just something related to my house or block – I went to usgs.gov to see what kind of information was available. I had no idea if they reported earthquakes live, as, for example, VDOT does in Virginia for traffic.
I found that they do indeed report earthquakes live, or at least soon after the actual quake. But when I checked around 4:20 a.m., there was nothing about anything in Roanoke.
I submitted my experience on a form called “Did You Feel It?“, where users can submit their reports from the quake and have them plotted on a community map.
But as Rob reported in Mexico, the tweets beat U.S. Geological Survey by at least 20 minutes.
Which is not to say that the USGS didn’t do a good job. To the contrary, I was amazed and impressed not only by how quickly they confirmed and reported the earthquake, but also how thorough and open their information was.
Around 4:35 a.m., 27 minutes after the quake, the USGS had confirmed the earthquake and had a preliminary summary posted. The page initially listed the quake’s magnitude (which was originally said to be a 2.6), the exact time (4:08 a.m.), the estimated location (listed by latitude and longitude, as well as distances from major locations, i.e. 3 miles from Roanoke), the margin of error for the location and some scientific data about the event that I don’t even understand.
The confirmation and information provided by the USGS allowed my editor and I at The Roanoke Times to post a tweet by 4:39 a.m.:
roanoketimes (4:39 a.m.): U.S. Geological Survey confirms 2.6 magnitude earthquake in Roanoke at 4:08 a.m. Saturday. Epicenter: Cave Spring. // http://bit.ly/X49kB
Shortly minutes after that, we posted a brief on roanoke.com and posted similar information on our Roanoke Times Facebook page.
The combination of those Twitter users letting me know that what I had experienced was not an isolated event and the USGS being so proactive and technologically forthcoming with information allowed The Roanoke Times / roanoke.com to be the first to break the news.
This was important for several reasons:
- Roanoke hasn’t had an earthquake in at least several decades, so this was potentially, um, groundbreaking. (Get it?)
- Being able to get the news out so quickly, through the post, a breaking news e-mail and tweets of our own allowed us to assuage some fears about what had happened.
- And hey – it’s never a bad thing when we can say, “We broke it first.”
It was important to post tweets about the earthquake, in addition to the traditional brief and breaking news e-mail. Since I had originally seen so many tweets about the earthquake, posting accurate and official information in that same forum was extremely important. Twitter users immediately saw the post and began “retweeting” it – sharing it with others.
This was a great example of how the Internet allowed us to effectively calm concerns and get the necessary information out there. If I had not seen those first tweets, I might not have followed-up on the story with such immediacy. And if the USGS’s website wasn’t so helpful, accurate and speedy, doubt over what had happened would have lingered much longer, potentially sparking rumors and fear.
This is all to say – Twitter can be an enormously helpful tool for journalists to find immediate information about breaking news – fires, wrecks, natural disasters, etc. Posts from Twitter should – and I hope this is obvious – always be confirmed through official sources. But they can provide a context with which to being your reporting.
And having a presence on Twitter for your news organization allows you to get the news out in a medium people are already using. Sure, you should post a brief to your website, send out an e-mail/SMS message/etc. But you should also reach out to users where they already spend time – Twitter, Facebook – even Digg.
Other sources:
Alltel commerical a blatant copy of old Chris Farley SNL sketch
I wish I had found an online clip of the actual Alltel commercial I’m speaking of. It’s the recent one where the chubby guy with curly hair portraying Verizon (his name is actually Michael Busch) goes on about why people aren’t buying cell service from him. He uses air quotes as he comes up with a lot of exaggerated examples, including one something like, “So my mother didn’t love me.”
It’s a rip-off of this classic Chris Farley sketch!
Now sure – most comedy builds off previous works. But this is just copying – it’s not anything new. Even worse, I think, is that it’s not even funny.
Simpsons episode features YouTube a capella
Unfortunately I only just got around to watching last weekend’s Simpsons on Tivo, but I caught this.
The episode featured the audio and video of that clip as the closing credits music. The performance is by a group called Canvas.
