Media Discontent

I've been dealing with the same thing myself off and on over the past few months, as I've been talking with a reporter who is working on a story about weblogging (possibly the same story, though I'm not sure). While when we first started talking I wasn't terribly concerned, as the conversation progressed, I started to wonder about the tone of the final article, enough to finally express my concerns to him.

My communication with him has been spotty lately — primarily my fault, as I got behind in my e-mail — but I'm holding out hope that the final result won't be entirely gloom and doom. We shall see, though…

Although I understand that Nick Denton thinks my Wired News article on Fark allegedly selling paid placement was a non-story - and that because he told me so I shouldn't have bothered to write it - I'd like to point out that he didn't say he was quoted out of context. Nor could he have.

My Denton quote in the story had nothing to do with Fark, but rather with Forbes.com's use of IntelliTxt, a service which provides in-story links to ads.

I understand the problem with quoting people out of context. I'm sure I've done it, though I try hard not to.

But I think your assessment of Denton's complaint is off base. He has every right to argue that there never should have been a story about Fark's alleged practice, but he knew I was doing the story, and he talked to me anyway. I didn't quote him talking about Fark, and so I think your statement that Denton is fortunate to be able to use his blog to get his "side of the story out after having been threatened with quotes out of context" isn't fair.

Wow, Anil... I didn't realize you had so much in common with Donald Rumsfeld there.... ;-)

jd

Sorry, Daniel, I should be clear I'm conflating two things here... There are issues of some reporters taking things out of context, and there are some editors and reporters who have an angle on a story before they've gone out and sought sources, and sometimes those two tendencies overlap. I'm definitely not accusing you of either trait, necessarily, just observing how common it is for bloggers to feel this way.

This is interesting because as a reporter, I've thought about this a great deal. Sometimes I get complaints from subjects of articles regarding not the accuracy of their quotes but the context in which they were used -- this despite every effort I make, as Daniel says he does, of getting things right.

Without slighting the importance of these efforts to get things right, I've come to the conclusion that such issues of context, angle, etc. are just part of the business, and that anyone who talks to reporters is just asking for trouble.

Journalism demands fixed ideas and narratives, and so often life is not as neat and precise -- and if you talk to a reporter, your quote is going to be squeezed into his narrative, and your vision, your narrative, will likely not be reflected in the article. This happens because of the things Anil mentions (editors pre-determining story angles, etc) but also because your narrative, your version of the story, may not be as interesting as the reporter's version, or may not be as salable in the marketplace, or for any number of other reasons.

Because of these realities, every piece of journalism is essentially a little bit of fiction -- which doesn't mean it shouldn't be trusted, just that it's bound to have errors, because any analogue to life has errors.

And so when people ask, What errors are we missing in other stories where we're not already experts? My answer is: A whole lot of probably very serious errors.

It would be nice to see reporter's notes that go with news stories. Perhaps a reporter could post full interviews and notes/research/info as "DVD extras" included with news stories (maybe for a fee or as a subscription benefit).