Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
How false reports of Boston bombing arrest
left media…
How false reports of Boston bombing arrest
left media outlets scrambling
Boston
April 17, 2013
-
-
Playing devil's advocate, what opposing view could be expressed?
1) If the anonymous source was accurate, the news sources would have gotten ahead of any competitors. They would gain a reputation as the place to come to for the most up-to-date information on the topic.
2) The FBI may have been trying to suppress the information regarding the suspect, meaning these news sources would have been acting in transparency.
What is your opinion about the issue, and what caused you to form that opinion?
2) Those who got their info from the source should have vetted the information the source was giving them. The source may have been trying to do the right thing by going to the press, but it was incorrect information that should never have been reported.
3) Hunting for sources is never a bad thing. But searching for any source of news for the sake of content is dishonest and wrong.
1) News outlets need to keep accountability as the most important thing in journalism. By reporting on unconfirmed, anonymous sources, they misinformed the people and lost all credibility when it comes to the entire story.
How could using a balance in research and reporting tactics have made a difference in the outcome of what was reported?
1) The most important thing here is that the source was not vetted and the information being reported was not confirmed by any other source.
2) Information from anonymous sources, especially sources that have not previously been proven as trustworthy, need to be supported.