TED Conversations

Dan Jacob

The IDIA Group

TEDCRED 500+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Should newspapers be truth vigilantes?

Arthur Brisbane, Public Editor for the New York Times wrote an interesting article OpEd today (January 12, 2012) asking "Should the New York Times Be a Truth Vigilante?"

The article can be found here: http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/should-the-times-be-a-truth-vigilante/

In a time where people are being bombarded with information, what role (if any) should newspapers play in correcting un-informed, egregiously inaccurate statements? What implications would this have?

To quote Brisbane:

"...[People] look to The [New York] Times to set the record straight. They worry less about reporters imposing their judgment on what is false and what is true.
Is that the prevailing view? And if so, how can The Times do this in a way that is objective and fair? Is it possible to be objective and fair when the reporter is choosing to correct one fact over another? Are there other problems that The Times would face that I haven’t mentioned here?"

Interested to hear your thoughts on this one...

+2
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jan 13 2012: We already have enough of people's opinions with all the blogs and electronic media so I suggest the newspapers to be more like magazines ... more commercial and entertaining (meaning better shots, better writers, better editing and original ideas). Otherwise they would just become another electronic source of info ... paper publishing is still considered credible but for how long?
    • Jan 14 2012: Silvia, magazines are not newspapers, they serve different purposes or at least should do so. There is enough commercial things out there to keep one entertained. A good newspaper has all those things you mentioned (better shots, better writers, better editing and original ideas). The newspaper should not be taken for granted, like most of my generation (we in our 20's). Paper publishing will always be considered more credible, it has a face, an identity that you can hold accountable, while internet postings do not, you have no idea who is behind them and if you can ever find them or demand a justification for what they wrote, something I find to be very important now a days with all the hacks out there saying what ever they want without thought.
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2012: Thanks for your opinion, Tiago. Seems to me that I dislike today's newspapers because they are really repulsive at least in my country.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.