Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
295,858
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 59:
Line 59: + + + + +
→Reputation of the author
The challenge for young readers is to discern good, solid, factual reporting in the internet era, at a time when an explosion of anonymous blog sites are threatening the existence of a dying print and cable news broadcast industry.<ref>A prime example of [[Joseph Schumpeter]]'s [[creative destruction]].</ref> Again the reputation of the author is all pervasive. This requires follow-up and holding the author (whether anonymous or a pseudonym) accountable, and not seeking [[confirmation bias]] in how a reader informs themself.
The challenge for young readers is to discern good, solid, factual reporting in the internet era, at a time when an explosion of anonymous blog sites are threatening the existence of a dying print and cable news broadcast industry.<ref>A prime example of [[Joseph Schumpeter]]'s [[creative destruction]].</ref> Again the reputation of the author is all pervasive. This requires follow-up and holding the author (whether anonymous or a pseudonym) accountable, and not seeking [[confirmation bias]] in how a reader informs themself.
===Holding the author accountable===
As can be seen, the reputation of a news organization or individual journalist can change over time, either improved or loss of credibility.
''[[The New Yorker]]'' for example, once had a reputation for vigorous fact checking. However after its reporting on the credibility of [[Wikipedia], its fictionalized account of the death of [[bin Laden]], its hit piece on the person and character of ''American Sniper'' hero [[Chris Kyle]], and it's partisan, sloppy, and outrageous attacks on [[Brett Kavanaugh]] have called its validity into question.
===Wrap up smear===
===Wrap up smear===