The AJC Promises To Cite Sources
Decatur Metro | May 8, 2009In an interview with WABE this morning, AJC editor Julia Wallace hints at more changes to the redesign in future months. Here’s what stood out to me…
Over time, Wallace says the AJC will become more transparent. Alongside articles, readers will see pros and cons to issues, what sources reporters used and how you, the reader, can access the information.
It seems that someone out there is listening. If not to me, than to someone else who’s saying something very similar. I’ll be very interested to see how this translates onto paper and whether it will also be done online.
Regardless, this is a big step in the right direction. Keep it up AJC. More people, myself included, are warming up to the redesign on a daily basis.
Latest from Decaturish
I found this comment interesting in light of something I’ve noticed in the Metro section of the AJC–the little blurbs on various metro counties & cities is, in Decatur’s case, almost entirely made up of verbatim press releases, I’m assuming from City Hall. Today the note was about Glenlake pool, and it read exactly the same, I believe, as the note about the pool in the Decatur Focus. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with this–I’m glad the city’s being diligent about getting news out, and if the AJC just wants to compile press releases and not have reporters do reporting that’s fine, don’t really care. But I think it’s very important, if you’re going to publish press releases, to source the material so readers know where the information is coming from.
Julia, good eye. I saw that blurb this morning too and have heard similar criticisms in other forums (though they aren’t always as polite.)
I think this is just part of the evolution of media. Papers never had to cite sources in the past because there were limited places where it could be accessed.
But that’s all changed thanks to the development of social media and the most important unofficial rule (hattiping/sourcing). If the AJC does what it says it will, it’ll be a huge leap forward. I don’t currently know of other newspapers that do anything similar.
I would be quite surprised, even in light of Wallace’s comments, if the AJC begins citing bloggers. When she says “citing sources” I take that as, “If we found data to support Story A, we’re going to show readers the data and make sure they can access it.” I think she means bringing readers more into the process of reporting, giving them more access to the raw materials. Now, occasionally, that might mean a blog or two is mentioned, particularly if it regards something like Atlanta Unfiltered, which produces an impressive amount of first-generation reporting. That Web site just published a huge scoop on the internals of the DeKalb County Police Department. But, as per traditional journalism standards, that source should have — and was, I believe — cited in the AJC’s and other publications’ reports on the matter. Just my take on it, but I think blog credit has little to do with what she’s saying on there.
I must admit, I still don’t quite understand this obsession with so-called “hat-tipping.” The success of a blog isn’t so different from the success of any print publication. If the blog does a good job getting the information out there, people go there, regardless of linking, hat-tipping and so forth. Most of my favorite blogs have thrived essentially on the value of their information and commentary. Their immediacy too. I don’t see why there should be some universal standard of “credit” outside what is considered standard journalistic practice.
I could be wrong about this, but, as far as I can tell, Decatur Metro and inDECATUR have earned pretty impressive readerships without loads of credit (save for the occasional mention in established print publications). People come here because they feel the site is essential in some way. Why focus so much on credit? If you got a story first, you won. You got it first. That’s the feat. Because I think credit will be less important in the future as blogs become less novel and more standardized.
Become a blogger. That’s the only way to understand the “obsession” with giving credit.
But here’s a hint: credit creates community and shows appreciation. Not giving it creates competition. Butthis ain’t an either/or. The AJC has sat far away on the “competition” side for far too long. They’re number 1. They need to stop being paranoid and do a little news-snogging! (BTW, reporters on Twitter are also a good step in the right direction. I’m a big fan o’ that.)
And even if they still won’t cite unworthy blogs when they publish original content – due to some sort of ridiculous academic-sounding stigma argument – I still say citing sources is a step in the right direction. But even you admit – even as you generalize “blogs” – that there are exceptions to the rule. Its still news wherever its found.
We continue to blur the line. Oooh…good name for a blog!
And please tell me why blogs will become less novel…
Citing sources is just good journalism isn’t it?
I’ll resist a weak joke here about the AJC first becoming thinner and then more transparent…
In a world where many highly editorial programs and networks claim to be news sources, I am delighted to hear facts stated clearly and perhaps a little explanation on how various factions may view the situation. Argumentative talking heads or their equivalent ranting in print should fade into the past in the same way that bear baiting did.
I’m bored by the commentors who can’t understand why DM wants credit in the AJC or other mainstream media. I get a lot of valuable information here that is obviously not covered at all in the AJC- and this information is collected and provided for comment free of charge. In my mind, free means that you have to take the good along with what might annoy you.
(personally, I agree with Decaturcomp that citing sources is good journalism)
For mainstream, professional journalists there’s a big difference between getting an unverified tip from a blogger, the neighbor of a crime suspect or anyone else — and doing the legwork to prove the tip. What you’ll likely see in the AJC is a link to the documentation found by a reporter, a long list of people interviewed or perhaps a detailed explanation of how the newspaper did its data analysis.
Bloggers giving hat tips to each other is a nice way for them to drive traffic to each other’s sites, but that’s not the same as being a crucial, verified source on a news story.
Good point primadonnamomma. And I guess that’s because tips used to come from a large variety of sources. But what happens when those tips begin to be gathered and disseminated by single source? Does that not change the dynamic?
Oh and blogs like this one do sometimes engage in original reporting…just FYI.
And its not just about citing, its the AJC’s general stance in the Atlanta media world. They are very standoffish. In all my time, I’ve only twice received emails AJC reporters saying thanks. This is perfectly fine, if they didn’t troll the very sites they ignore.
Honestly, I don’t need all sorts of publicity. Hell I’m semi-anonymous what do I care? I just like to see the AJC to live up to its position. It should be creating a city-wide network of resources, promoting journalism and comradeship. Instead all bloggers hear are insults and many other ATL journalists feel slighted when the AJC picks up their story without a peep.
And though it may seem like I spend a lot of time writing about this topic, there are so many other things I’d rather discuss. However, like it or not, I find myself in a unique position…a local blog that provides real news in an unconventional way. As such, I feel like I can have an impact and help coax the AJC out of its cave. Maybe what I’m doing is counterproductive, maybe it won’t work. But at least I’m giving constructive criticism, I’m not just spouting off.
One of my many thousands of current job descriptors and an actual part of my job title is communications director. Printing verbatim press releases is pretty much par for the course- Creative Loafing once printed an article based on one of my press releases that was 6 paragraphs- 4 lifted directly from my release plus an intro and a conclusion by the writer. I don’t think that’s a huge deal in the media world. It’s been this way for ever; this isn’t some new media laziness.
Honestly, any PR person would prefer to have them lift straight from the page rather than losing a message or facts. We actually like it that way, to blunt.
Anyway, I don’t think a press release is really considered a “source” in the same way Deep Throat or Decatur Metro would be considered sources- the stuff of press releases like the pool release is just a rote who, what,when, where, how, why. Once we fax, email, carrier pigeon them over, a press release is pretty much public domain and usually isn’t cited to the best of my knowledge.