About Imran Anwar Expertise Imran Anwar is a respected and globally recognized media expert and writer on issues relating to media, newspapers, TV and broadcast, as well as matters relating to Pakistan/India, Middle East, South Asia, and Islam & Muslims. He is a frequent TV guest and http://imran.com carries some of his works.
Experience Founder of NEWWWS, first daily online newspaper service. Founding Editor of Pakistan News Service. Helped establish Pakistan's largest national daily multi-city newspaper including technology, content and marketing and editorial consulting.
Publications Wall Street Journal
News International
Mag Weekly
Education/Credentials BSEE, MBA Columbia University
Question 1.) Is it ethical for a news agency to report on a hot news initially reported from a "credible" news establishment without checking its sources?
2.) In your opinion, is inaccurate reporting by journalists from credible major news establishment who get the story from the internet excusable?
3.) Can consumers rely on online news portal for accurate news?
Answer Hello Siti. I will try to answer your questions individually.
1. NO. But, it is done all the time. I am only half-joking when I state the following. If I could find a way to have some printing press employee slip my picture on the cover of TIME Magazine as it goes to printing, and say, "Jesus is Back" by noon the next day, instead of it being exposed as a hoax, I will probably be getting interviewed by all the major news outlets, and 80% of the media would carry on that story as fact that I am in fact the second coming of Holy Prophet Jesus Christ. I know this is an exaggeration, but you get the idea.
2. GETTING the story from the Internet is not the issue. For example, suppose it was in a newsgroup or online chat that someone hears the President is having an affair with an intern. The fact that the SOURCE of the RUMOR (not NEWS, but RUMOR) was on the Internet does not make it a crime. It would be that reporter's reporting the words as hard fact, as NEWS, which would make it inexcusable. And that applies whether he/she picked up the rumor/news on the Internet on at a Starbucks coffee shop.
3. DEPENDS. e.g. I will give as much credibility to the Wall Street Journal's web site as to its print edition. i would find the announcement of UFOs and alien invasions in a tabloid as silly in print as online. So, when in doubt, consider the source.
And that applies to the news we hear on TV too or read in print, on serious issues. e.g. how fair and balanced can we expect a Jewish reporter of a Jewish owned newspaper in NY to be when reporting on the Middle East issue from Israel? Not very - unless the person happens to be uniquely fair and balanced. The same thing would apply to a Pakistani Muslim reporter reporting for a Pakistani newspaper from the Hindu-Indian occupied Muslim state of Kashmir.
One can see the report of the facts but should always consider the SOURCE/ORIGIN of the person and be on the lookout of the words used by that person.
A good (bad?) example of that is how the NY Times will report a killing of 4 Israelis by Palestinians as "Palestinians Massacre Jews" on the front page, while 14 Palestinian civilians killed by Israelis is Page 14 news mentioned in passing with "14 Palestinians Die" as a tiny heading.
We all have our preferences and our prejudices. I only get upset when media that we consider as representing OUR, AMERICAN interests, skew the news and views to serve the interests of some foreign entity. That shows us that even the most well known print/TV media can not be trusted for ACCURATE news if they have their own bias shoved in there, so the small online portals are not the only ones we have to mistrust or check on carefully. Hope this helps understand the scope of the problem.
