This is yet another golden opportunity for the media outlets and journalists who spread this flatly inaccurate story: for self-reflection, process examination, course correction, and public disclosure.
And an opportunity, as well, for the nation's community of journalists and their professional organizations to reassert best – and necessary – practices for fact checking prior to publication, and on correction v. retraction on media websites and in social media feeds.
Will any of them do so here? Past experience makes one skeptical: too many highly similar instances have occurred in recent years without any notable public reckoning.
Yet in the hopes that this high profile gaffe might have inflicted sufficient embarrassment and reputational loss, it'd be worth looking for both article corrections and social posts over the next couple of weeks from:
* The media outlets who uncritically spread this story beyond KFOR. Along with Rolling Stone, these included, but were not limited to, The Hill, the New York Daily News, Insider (formerly Business Insider), Newsweek, and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Lauren Peikoff (both via tweets), along with some local news stations.
(And in the UK, The Guardian and The Daily Mail.)
* The reporters and editors at each such outlet who either adapted and further shared, or republished, this story without doing basic fact checking.
* Professional organizations and publications, such as the Society of Professional Journalists and the Columbia Journalism Review.
As well, it'll be instructive to see which outlets formally retract the story, rather than issuing corrections. And/or take down their social posts about it, ideally also putting up new ones (referencing or screenshotting the prior, erroneous posts).
The vaccinated are ending up in the hospital and dying too. Too soon to tell how well the vaccines prevented higher mortality
This is yet another golden opportunity for the media outlets and journalists who spread this flatly inaccurate story: for self-reflection, process examination, course correction, and public disclosure.
And an opportunity, as well, for the nation's community of journalists and their professional organizations to reassert best – and necessary – practices for fact checking prior to publication, and on correction v. retraction on media websites and in social media feeds.
Will any of them do so here? Past experience makes one skeptical: too many highly similar instances have occurred in recent years without any notable public reckoning.
Yet in the hopes that this high profile gaffe might have inflicted sufficient embarrassment and reputational loss, it'd be worth looking for both article corrections and social posts over the next couple of weeks from:
* The media outlets who uncritically spread this story beyond KFOR. Along with Rolling Stone, these included, but were not limited to, The Hill, the New York Daily News, Insider (formerly Business Insider), Newsweek, and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Lauren Peikoff (both via tweets), along with some local news stations.
(And in the UK, The Guardian and The Daily Mail.)
* The reporters and editors at each such outlet who either adapted and further shared, or republished, this story without doing basic fact checking.
* Professional organizations and publications, such as the Society of Professional Journalists and the Columbia Journalism Review.
As well, it'll be instructive to see which outlets formally retract the story, rather than issuing corrections. And/or take down their social posts about it, ideally also putting up new ones (referencing or screenshotting the prior, erroneous posts).
A Twitter thread by Drew Holden, identifying many of the erroneous 'outward ripples in the pond' which helped spread this false story: https://twitter.com/DrewHolden360/status/1434591443855753220