Unrestricted Web Publishing

The foundations of news reporting are the sources of the information that supports the accounts and claims made within a piece of written content.  In the age of the World Wide Web, it becomes challenging to clearly identify sources and evaluate their creditability.  Online content is filled with user generated blogs and opinion based articles, so it is important for readers to be able to sort through this information to discern if what they are reading is coming from legitimate and reliable sources.To better illustrate the investigation process of assessing sources, I selected a current events article published on the Time website entitled “Authorities Arrest Captain of Capsized Ferry”, and I tracked each of the cited sources. To determine the creditability of each source, I utilized the “Criteria to Evaluate the Credibility of WWW Resources”, which was published by Virginia Montecino in August 1998.  Although the Time article was relatively brief, the author, Maya Rhodan, noted three different sources to support her story.  Before even diving into the sources, I noticed that Ms. Rhodan also noted her Twitter handle next to her name to direct her readers from her formalized, source rich article, to her 140 character social media reporting outlet.  I also noticed that this online article, like most of articles of the same nature, do not end with a formal work cited page, as suggested in Virginia Montecino outline; rather, authors utilize links directly to the source they are referencing, which actually promotes consumer research and evaluation.

Two source links are found in the very first line of text, referring back to a CNN article discussing the arrest of the South Korean Ferry captain who abandoned his sinking Ferry boat, and then to an earlier Time article on the current death toll from the incident.  Both articles appear on creditable websites and their authors are clearly associated with these noteworthy news outlets, provide current information on the incident, and do not show a bias on the subject, which are all highlights of the Virginia Montecino evaluation criteria.  The Time article appears to follow the same format as the original piece, but the CNN article, which is referred to multiple times throughout the article, looks to be an account from a reporter closer to the scene; the article itself, which discusses the arrest of the Ferry captain, was authored by three different individuals who recount the reporting of an individual in South Korea.  This presentation provokes the question, “Is there any evidence that the author of the Web information has some authority in the field” and “With what organization or institution is the author associated?” (Virginia Montecino, 1998)  The three authors of the article, all noted as representatives from CNN, identify their source as a CNN affiliate, YTN, based in South Korea.  This article provides no other linked source, so all of the provided information is said to have been from YTN.


The third source, which is identified as the AFP, is cited in the middle of the report, and it supports the statement that arrest warrants were issued for several members of the Ferry crew.  Unlike the first two sources noted, I was not familiar with AFP, so I definitely felt the need to investigate it further.  If I was not doing this exercise, I probably would have not checked the CNN and Time sources because I consider them to be trusted news outlets, but, as an educated media consumer, that should not be an excuse to not check the facts of a story.  When I arrived at the AFP website, the title of the site was noted as “The Sunday Times.”  Since that did not seem to fully described the abbreviation, I clicked on the wording and was brought to the homepage entitled, The Straits Times, which is a news publication based in Singapore.  Knowing this, it seems that this was an account provided by a news outlet that was much closer to the situation than that of the original article in Time.  The article on The Straits Times did not list an author and did not offer any additional sources, so I had reached another dead end as I had done with the CNN article reporting from their affiliate.  Trusted news outlets in our nation are using reports from journalists in other nations instead of sending their own reporters to the location, which truly shows the reach of global reporting and connectivity provided by the World Wide Web.  However, because there are no global guidelines to evaluate sources like the ones provided by Virginia Montecino, it becomes increasingly difficult for consumers to fully examine each source because it is coming from a world away.

After completing this examination of the Time article's sources, it is clear that unrestricted web publishing can be a very harmful tool.  Unreliable information can spread through the world like wild fire with the help of online social media forums.  Particularly in the case of this article or any article regarding tragic events, families are anxiously waiting to hear about the fate of their loved ones, so any report on the subject is taken very seriously by those directly affected.  Additionally, although the CNN article used a source presented as a legitimate first-hand account, it is very easy for consumers to present their created content in the same manner even if it is not truly such an account. Mass communication has evolved to allow consumers to participate largely in the transmission of information, and this blurs the lines between true journalism and user generated material. Therefore, sources become a critical part in the differentiation between fact and fiction, but verifying sources has become even more challenging in the age of digital media.

Social Media and Truth

Social media connects the entire world in one simple forum, and it allows for a continuous free flow of information.  As a busy working professional and graduate student, I rely heavily on new media outlets, such as social media sites, as my daily source of information.  I try to set aside time to sit down and watch a nightly newscast or to read a newspaper, but having access to information 24/7 through my mobile device has made many traditional media outlets obsolete in my life. 

Although having unlimited access to information is beneficial, it is not always easy to identify if the information I am receiving from these sites are completely accurate.  As consumers and active participants in the information creation and sharing process, one should look critically at the information they are receiving.  In their text Blur: How to Know What’s True in the Age of Information Overload, Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel discuss the role of social media in reporting, and state, “They [social media sites] are ways of conveying information, but they do not dictate the nature of the information conveyed.”  Unlike traditional media, consumers may not be able to determine the source of information from a social media report, which makes it challenging to draw conclusions about its truth.  Even when social media reporting is coming from trusted sources like CNN or Fox News, the journalism of assertion (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010) seems to be taking over in the world of new media.  Society wants their information “right now,” so the pressure to provide that often allows for inaccurate initial reports that will be followed by corrections in a future follow-up story.      

To decipher through the world of instant news reporting, one has to examine the source and forum in which the information is presented in order to draw educated and informed conclusions from the report.  Additionally, perception is also a key factor when reading any type of media.  As NPR Ombudsman Alicia Shepard stated in a 2010 radio interview that, “one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.”  Reporting is not meant to be advocating (Shepard, 2010), but social media has allowed for opinion based and bias reporting to disguise itself as truth.  Trained journalists are not the only ones delivering information; consumers can now create and share content, and that is what makes it difficult to sort through true information or bias exposés.   

I looked back on the last week and tried to pinpoint just one piece of news that I had learned from a social media outlet, and it was difficult for me because almost all of the information I receive comes from social media.  Over dinner with my husband, I will always ask “oh, did you hear about…” a particular event and he will usually say “yes” or that he “didn’t get to check Facebook or Twitter today.”  This really portrays the new trend of how we receive information.  I find that the place I turn to most to follow news reports is Twitter because I can find additional reporting and user conversations by following the “hashtag.”  Twitter is a great example of how fact and opinion are intermixed together as all of the discussions regarding a particular topic are grouped together under a “hashtag.”  Most recently, I followed the initial developing reports of the Malaysian Airlines disappearance, and it was amazing to see how many people were “tweeting” about the same topic.  This, however, also depicts how quickly misinformation can spread when millions of social media users are engaging in a conversation about the same topic.  

The process of receiving and sharing information has changed drastically with the introduction of social media.  Consumers are more involved in the media process than ever before, and they are faced with the challenge to decide what media sources are accurate and who they will trust for their daily information.  It is not that all social media reporting is inaccurate; it is that the lines of journalism are now blurred, and fact and opinion have become interchangeable.  Consumers and contributors to media have a new found responsibility to not only provide accurate information, but to also examine the information that they are receiving in order to create an honest exchange of information.

Influence of the Media

New media has a huge influence on my daily life, and both my personal and professional activities are centered around new media outlets, especially those fueled by technology. 

In terms of my personal use, I have my iPhone, iPad, and laptop that keep me constantly connected to the outside world through the World Wide Web.  I frequent several social media sites in order to keep up with friends, and I receive most of my news from these sites and the internet in general.  In his text “Mass Media Influence on Society,” Dr. Anthony Curtis notes, “It’s not unusual to wake up, check the cellphone for messages and notifications, look at the TV or newspaper for news, commute to work, read emails, take meetings and makes phone calls, eat meals with friends and family, and make decisions based on the information that we gather from those mass media and interpersonal media sources.”  This is almost an exact outline of how my day plays out, and hearing this information from an authority of the subject shows that I am not the only one who relies on new media to go through my daily routine.

My professional life is just as focused on new media and technology as my personal life.   I have another iPad for business use that allows me to remotely connect to my business network so I can work even when I am not in the office.  Additionally, I manage my company’s website and I will eventually be managing our social media presence, so I am always utilizing online resources to improve upon our website and create a social media action plan for when we are ready to roll out our company Facebook page.  I focus mainly on my company’s digital presence because the internet has become the major hub for information. During an interview on the changing landscape of knowledge in the digital age, David Weinberger, senior researcher at Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society, reflected that, “When you have a medium that is unrestricted in how much it can handle, as the Internet is, we are better able to investigate an idea without stopping points, we're able to get explanations at every level of expertise.”  The internet has made information so accessible, that companies have to put most of their branding and marketing efforts into the digital field. 

As I have mentioned, social media plays a large role in my daily use of new media.  I have personal accounts on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn, and I use these outlets as my main source of information throughout the day.  Social media is a great way to receive news in real time, but this also allows for a certain amount of inaccuracies in reporting.  So many news outlets, and individual users themselves, are reporting on live incidents and sharing that information at an exponential rate.  Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel note in there text Blur: How to Know What’s True in the Age of Information Overload that, “Though we may little understand how, we are all assuming more control over what we know about the world beyond our direct experience.  We are becoming our own editors, our own gatekeepers, our own aggregators.”  New media has allowed members of society to actively participate in the cultivation and delivery of information, and that does cause issues with the authenticity of reports.  It is easy to believe the first initial details of a story when everyone on your Facebook Timeline or your Twitter Newsfeed are taking about it and repeating the same breaking news, but it is important to be cautious and aware of the power of mass communication.  Although I rely mainly on the internet and social media for news, I am more careful about taking initial reports at face value.  A recent example of the power of news reporting and mass communication would be the hunt for the Boston Marathon bombing suspects.  As soon as their photos were released, hundreds of thousands of people were sharing the information on the internet and were misidentifying the suspects’ identities.  Although this information sharing was a vital part of the investigation, it also led to much speculation and misrepresentation of facts. 

In the age of new media, all members of society play a role in the news reporting process, so it is important to be aware of this reality so that we can think critically about the information we are receiving before we take it as fact.