Let's not sacrifice accuracy

It used to only be the mission of television stations to be the first station to break news. When we talk in class about whether or not to go with accuracy or speed, my first instinct is to still think of TV stations, not newspapers.

But with the emergence of the Internet, it’s an issue newspaper companies must address now too. Nearly every newspaper has a Web site. But the problem arises with the newspaper business’ relative inexperience in dealing with breaking news. TV has had the objective of rushing news onto the air since it’s been around. Newspapers, on the other hand, haven’t had much time to adjust to the fact that their Web sites are now breaking news outlets as well.

Some people hear of breaking news but don’t have the opportunity to turn on a TV. Take students at Missouri, for example. Just a week or two ago I was in class and didn’t have the opportunity to turn on a TV to check the updates on a breaking news situation in Kansas City. So my first instinct was to have a friend check the Star’s Web site to see if it had any information on the situation, which it did.

Newspapers are quickly rushing breaking news to Web sites. But you have to wonder what’s lost in the process. There’s no time to fact check an article, yet still be the first outlet to present the news on your Web site. So accuracy is what gets left behind.

I noticed this in a recent case here in Columbia. When Mike Anderson Jr. of the Missouri basketball team was arrested for a DWI, the Kansas City Star posted the news on its Web site the next day. It was the first outlet to report the information that I saw. I’m sure the Star thinks its credibility improves because it was first to report the news. But when reading the article, I thought less of the publication. I was disappointed to see how many errors the story included, both grammar and factual.

I was at the Missourian when we reported the breaking news about Anderson Jr. on our on Web site. The first thing I heard when we finished the article was a comment about us being 40 minutes behind the Star. Ignored was the fact that our story included much more in-depth coverage about the situation.

But I also questioned our method of putting the story onto the Web site. We skipped over the copy desk, as to make sure our story was up on the site faster. It wasn’t until after the story was posted that I noticed a couple rather small factual errors in the story, which we later changed. While these particular errors were not unethical, rushing a story and choosing time over accuracy always allows for the possibility of having something important wrong with an article.

While growing up, I always looked at newspapers as the most credible media outlet. I figured they had the most time to get everything right. They had the time to check the facts in articles and to present all the information correctly. There were more people reading an article to ensure of its minimal mistakes. The Internet, unfortunately, has somewhat changed my opinion. Errors in a story on the Kansas City Star’s Web site affects much more than just the site. It affects my view of the entire publication.

Technology affects all media outlets. But the problem with newspapers is it might take awhile for them to learn how to become a breaking news publication. In my opinion, the most important thing is that they are careful not to hurt their credibility in the process of trying to be first. Accuracy needs to be chosen instead.

Sam