What ever happened to Responsible Journalism
According to an article written by Ben Dimiero for Media Matters titled “NY Times Issues Second Major Correction To Botched Report On Clinton's Emails” it is reported that “this morning, the New York Times issued a second substantial correction to its anonymously-sourced report that originally hyped a potential Department of Justice investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of personal email. The paper has now removed the claim -- which appeared in both the article's headline and first sentence -- that two inspectors general were seeking a "criminal" investigation into the handling of Clinton's emails. The paper has not addressed numerous lingering questions about both the sourcing and vetting of its report, with their corrections instead blaming the errors on "information from senior government officials" who remain anonymous. Times public editor Margaret Sullivan indicated on Twitter that she plans to weigh in on the story on Monday. A comparison of the opening sentence of the July 23 article as originally published and how it currently appears on the Times website underscores the deeply flawed nature of the paper's report. In less than 48 hours, the article went from alleging a request for a "criminal investigation" of Clinton herself to "an investigation" into whether information had been mishandled in connection with her email account. Here's the story's original opening, which appeared under the headline "Criminal Inquiry Sought In Clinton's Use of Email": Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday. And here's how it currently appears, as of 2:30 p.m. EST on July 25: Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.”
There used to be a question of ethics when a story was printed and passed on to the public. Journalist used to be extremely concerned with their reputation for reporting the truth as they have evidence of and being “fair and balanced” but this appears to be no more. Now it is all about what the writer or news agency owners or handlers wish to divulge. It is more important to be first and get more readership than ever being responsible for what is being said. News used to be presented as impartial as possible and the consumer were allowed to make up their own minds about on which side to stand, if they decided to take a side at all. I don’t know exactly what happened to responsible journalism but it can closely be assumed it all began when the news stopped being a service and started being a money-making enterprise.