The confusion resulting from the conflicting, and ultimately tragic, stories regarding the West Virginian mine workers earlier this week highlighted something that has been a long time developing - the printed newspapers are (in some ways) at a distinct disadvantage in this age of second-to-second updates. As Joan Vennochi, a columnist for the Boston Globe, writes, newspapers across the country preserved the miracle everyone wanted.
The old journalistic adage, get it first but first get it right, is both an albatross and a savior for modern newspapers. The struggle to keep up with the rush to news makes contemplative journalism a marketer's nightmare. On the other hand, mistakes, no matter how honestly made, hurt the old-line print media more than they hurt cable TV or online journalism.
The new media can correct course in real time. The old media's mistakes are cruel jokes and collector's items that greatly undercut credibility.
As we all know, cable television offers dramatic, second-by-second coverage of a disaster of this sort; when cable runs out of live images, because rescue crews are deep underground and out of camera range, the shows fill up air time with speculation and hypothetical scenarios that shape an impression of what might happen; what actually is happening is tangential to the cable TV plot.
Tuesday night's cable TV storyline was simple: One dead miner was discovered. Could the 12 remaining miners somehow be alive? Waiting to learn the actual news, and then reporting the ultimate truth, confirmed beyond a doubt, are not options for cable TV.
Neither is objectivity. The 24/7 cable news anchors and reporters quickly become adopted members of the worried, grieving families. The cable TV news crew is actively and ardently hoping, wishing and praying for the same miracle as the family members of the trapped miners. They rejoice in every sign of hope and grow melancholy when an unhappy ending seems probable. They are cheerleaders or professional mourners, depending on the latest development. They never pretend to be objective observers.
Greg Mitchell, who edits a journal for newspaper professionals called Editor & Publisher, blasted the response of the media (by way of his website) across the board. Though, as Vennochi points out, what was once "one of the most disturbing and disgraceful media performances of this type in recent years" was later edited to remove "disgraceful" - a luxury of online publication and real time editing.
Mitchell penned another story on the site today, this time specifically criticizing newspapers' defense of their reporting, which mostly consists of relying on the words of family members and the WV governor at the scene. They said the miners were found alive.
But what information actually came out during those fateful three hours, starting late Tuesday? Did reporters misinterpret what they heard or fail to raise doubts about credibility? What was most surprising in the many follow-up stories today was how few fresh details were added about sourcing -- including any mention of a single new source not already identified. Despite repeated attempts by E&P to reach reporters at the scene, none have yet responded.
The article goes on to trace the events step-by-step, highlighting that no one - not the governor, not the AP - actually named specific sources for the news that the miners were alive.
At 12:34 a.m., the first comment from Gov. Joe Manchin, who was with the miners' families, appeared. AP quoted him as saying, "They told us they have 12 alive. We have some people that are going to need some medical attention." It did not describe who "they" were, how Manchin had discovered this, and if this was an official announcement or on-the-fly.
Many newspapers have also attributed to Manchin a statement from this time period that "miracles do happen" (as The New York Times later had it) or "miracles happen," or "Believe in miracles" (CNN) -- none of which was exactly "a miracle did happen."
We now know, from Manchin and others, that he had been in the Sago Baptist Church when very unofficial word of a rescue filtered in, perhaps via cell phone, setting off a wild celebration. He joined in briefly, and then asked aides if they had actual confirmation.
When setting out to seek confirmation, a family member of Jerry Groves, one of the trapped miners, asked him if they were alive. He said yes. The governor has since said that moment, which was meant to be private, was soon transformed into an official announcement.
Yet many newspapers have referred to Manchin "announcing" that the miners had been saved.
The Washington Post, meanwhile, put to bed a front-page story which declared, without any qualifiers, that the miners had been found alive and the only source cited (beyond the families) was this: "Gov. Joe Manchin III said some would need medical attention."
Several papers reported Thursday that Manchin's office says he never tried to indicate he was clearly confirming that the miners were alive. The Charleston (W.V.) Gazette bolstered this claim, in revealing, "In the hour after the joyous announcement, Tom Hunter, Manchin's press secretary, told the media he could not give official confirmation that the dozen miners had indeed been found safe."
Every level of media was, of course, affected by these missteps - from the giants of the New York Times and Washington Post to the hacks on round-the-clock cable television. But CNN and Fox News have never had a problem vomiting up whatever anonymous or unconfirmed word is spat at them - and this story's impact on newspapers does seem to go beyond just the blame of having a deadline to adhere to. Perhaps even the upper echelons of serious journalism were so eager to report joy that reporting, at its core, really did get lost.
what's disturbing (and disgraceful) to me is that i haven't seen an apology from the media, just excuses and finger pointing.
this has just been a terrible ordeal for those miners and their families, and this whole fiasco only twists the knife. hopefully, after all these false miracles and premature celebrations, these families will have some real comfort and peace.
Who gives a shit what the newspapers report in the morning? The real disgrace was constantly shoving microphones in these people's faces so that they could answer the same questions with the same answers every thirty seconds. Made me sick.
The competitive nature of our advertising-driven news machine is making margins too tight for accuracy or humanity. FOX News was really the mainstream pioneer, as they threw out accuracy for sensationalism before it was even necessary. Before them the only people who would report something with the same kind of aggressive abandon were tabloids, and they were afforded an appropriate amount of respect.
I'm hoping for some kind of backlash, but I'm not holding my breath.
Deadlines, politics and generally feeling like a jackass when I interviewed people are the reasons I left journalism and went back to the job I had before.
makes a change from news reporters doing their best to report tragedy
during the live reporting of the oil explosions in hemel hempsted, as they interviewed more people the newsreaders looked increasingly disappointed as it became clear that the casualty rate wasn't going to be massive
misstyrios
NEWSWIRE
Allston, MA
JAN 05, 2006 08:40 PM