In the news business, being wrong used to be the kiss of death. It would cost a newspaper its reputation and its readers.

Back before the Internet allowed for speedy delivery of information and disinformation alike, news agencies could take the time to report and verify leads and rumors before going to print. News was usually accurate. Readers learned to believe what they read.

Somewhere along the way in the last decade or two, speed has taken over the steering wheel, often putting accuracy in the back seat. Being first increased the likelihood of getting clicks. More clicks mean more advertising revenue. Advertising income based on clicks was replacing advertising based on subscriptions. Follow the money.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with alluring headlines. Tension and conflict have always attracted readers. As the old journalist saying goes, “if it bleeds, it leads.” But these days we are skipping the part of actually checking whether the reports of blood are accurate. How can you tell blood from ketchup in a YouTube video? Or check a person’s identity behind a Twitter tweet?

News agencies are citing each other, whipping up a frenzy of outrage and urgency, while skipping the part where they do their own reporting to verify the accuracy of the reports. Publish first, get the click and verify later.

The pressure to publish something increases exponentially when “everybody else has it.” We saw this happen at a dizzying speed during the stand-off between the students from Covington High School and Native Americans in D.C. One news agency picked up a bit of a video and wrote a story describing what could be seen in the clip. The others followed suit. We readers helped make it go viral.

Problem was, in the following days, additional information and footage appeared on social media and through news interviews. It showed a different story. Typically, these things would turn up in the reporting process before the story was printed. Instead, today, the readers are part of the reporting process.

A number of media companies are being sued after that event. In the rush to publish, the lack of complete reporting led to the defamation of citizens, the plaintiffs claim.

The result of all this rushed reporting is that consumers of news are better off disbelieving news articles unless they can be verified. But few of us have the tools to do so. How do you know if the news writer has done her due diligence before publication? Here are three things to flag.

The first is transparency. Whenever a news article cites reports or uses the word “reportedly,” be cautious. An organization that values accuracy also values transparency. That means the article will include links to the reports, so you can read yourself. The article should also tell you how they tried to verify it and what they learned. If the article does none of this, treat it as false until you can verify elsewhere.

The second is bias in word choice. Look out for unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. A reporter should never need to use words like “extreme,” “severe,” “excessive” or “lacking.”

Finally, watch out for fact choice. Just because an article includes a number or a video doesn’t mean the statistic is correct or the video shows the whole picture. Numbers do lie and seeing is not always believing. All our old sayings need to be turned on their heads.

Whatever you do, keep your critical-thinking hat on. Just because the reporter interviewed the source of a piece of information doesn’t mean it was verified. Same thing for a new report that reveals its source. It just means you have enough information to make your own decision about what you believe. That decision is yours.

We used to be able to afford believing a news item was true until it was disproven. Today, we don’t have that luxury. In fact, we have the opposite. But we can learn how to call out lack of transparency and bias. If we keep doing that, chances are accuracy will again reign king in news.

In the second half of the 1800s, we had a similar situation where printing costs made newspapers affordable for the masses. That brought about editorial pressure to sensationalize the news to attract readers with lucrative headlines. The phrase “Yellow Journalism” comes from this period. In time, we moved to adopting an ethical code that put accuracy at the center again.

Let’s hope that the pendulum will swing back this time too. Until then, readers need to take an active part in the process of verifying news before they decide what to believe.

(4) comments

Mark Hayes

Theoretically the media is absent of bias, realistically the media is the perpetrator of bias. They sell what people are willing to buy, after all, it is a business.

Peyton Cook

An excellent article that exposes the lack of a good share of all media for not doing due diligence to ascertain that what is published or spoken is true

The best part of the Internet is that people can now find all sorts of information in the pursuit of truth. No longer are we dependent on the media for this. It no longer has the ability to interpret facts to suit their mostly liberal agenda. Thus our President’s wise use of Twitter to get his unfiltered comments out of the DC Swamp. Talk radio is another great advancement in recent years, something greatly lacking in Europe, where US news comes through the NYT and other far left sources.

Peter Mamuzic

I could not agree with you more. Readers also must be aware that newspapers misquote, as The Pilot recently. The article is “Parents Push Pinehurst Council on School Redistricting” and the misquote indicated that a parent does not support the school board when in fact exactly the opposite was said. Readers must always be aware of possible reporting mistakes and papers mst strive for accuracy over expediency.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Comments that violate any of the rules above are subject to removal by staff.

Thank you for reading!

Please purchase a subscription to continue reading. Subscribe today and support local community journalism.

Digital Only Subscriptions

The Pilot

Get unlimited digital access and support award-winning local journalism, for just $5 a month. This includes access to the electronic replica edition of The Pilot.

Starting at
$5.35 for 30 days

Already have a Print Subscription? Get Digital Access Free.

The Pilot

As a print subscriber, you also have unlimited digital access. Connect your account now. Or, call customer service at 910-693-2487 for help.


Our system has been updated, if you are a current print subscriber and cannot obtain your unlimited access, please contact customer support 910-693-2490. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Home Delivery

The Pilot

Our best deal: Get all the news of Moore County delivered to your home each Wednesday and Sunday — and receive unlimited digital access to

Starting at
$27.82 for 90 days