Opinion - Readers' Editor : Online & Off line   

System vulnerabilities, human failings

In one of my recent columns, I said that with all the efforts newspapers put in, it is not possible to completely eliminate mistakes. Many readers have argued with me that this is fatalistic resignation. If proper systems are put in place, it should be possible to produce an error-free paper, they contend. I have tried to explain to them how newspaper production differs from other industries and does not qualify for the adoption of “zero-defect” concepts.

Even the mighty, the best-organised, slip. When they do, the results can be funny, shocking, even tragic. Ample proof of this proposition is available in a 366-page book, which not only has a big collection of such errors, but is also a journey into the history of media errors. Craig Silverman, journalist, who founded the website www.regrettheerror.com in October 2004, has used his three-year experience to provide what he calls “the first comprehensive examination of the level of accuracy in the press and the impact of errors.” Every day the website lists mistakes in newspapers, well-known and not-so-well-known, mainly from the United States, Britain and Australia. The book expands the study to analyse the how and why of mistakes and suggests ways to keep them in check.

It is only “check or reduce”, for, as Silverman asserts, there will never be a time of 100 per cent accuracy in the media. Every journalist admits it and that is the reality too. The reason for such a state is: there are too many outside forces and factors and too many inadequate and flawed internal procedures that afflict journalism. I have often pointed out that with all the technological advances, the human factor is still the key. Journalists are not robots, notes Silverman, they have failings like other human failings.

Again and again, the author focuses on trust. In journalism nothing is possible without trust. And it can be destroyed by errors. The press can regain it by re-dedicating itself to accuracy. According to Silverman, this is more important than ever before: “Since 1980 the public has come to view the news media as less than professional, less accurate, less caring, less moral and more inclined to cover up rather than correct mistakes. Spotting factual errors in press coverage has become a mission for groups and individuals — a blood sport.”

That is a sweeping statement. But is it factual errors alone that result in readers losing trust? No doubt accuracy is a major factor, but there are other aspects influencing readers’ attitude. A paper’s approach to issues and the stand it takes have a major impact on the trust readers repose in it. Silverman does not deal with this — but the focus throughout is on accuracy. The collection of corrections in the book makes interesting reading. Even a wizened journalist will be taken aback by the kind of mistakes that creep into newspapers. A good number of them relates to what Silverman calls “obiticides” — death by media errors — that report deaths wrongly.

An example is this correction in Brentwood Gazette (UK):

The Gazette would like to apologise to Martine Hopkins for incorrectly

reporting last week that her father had died of cancer. This was due to a

misunderstanding for which The Gazette is to blame. In fact her father

is still alive. The Gazette would like to apologise for any distress caused

to Miss Hopkins, her father and their family.

Media errors, says Silverman, arise from a number of causes, both human and systemic. The main reasons are sloppy, hurried reporting, bad typing, careless editing, unwarranted assumptions, faulty memory, inefficient processes, inelegant technologies that create error traps, or, occasionally, incompetence or malice. The newspaper system is rife with weaknesses and opportunities for error. While there are controls to prevent error at every stage in the production of newspapers, every system has its vulnerabilities and each of these stages has the ability to introduce or force errors.

Briefly tracing the development of newspaper journalism, Silverman says the concept of objectivity evolved gradually and accuracy as a codified professional ethic began to emerge only in the 20th century. Newspapers earlier had correction-like statements revealing the failings of previous reports. One of the earliest corrections is dated August 30, 1790. In 1913, Ralph Pulitzer, son of the famous Joseph Pulitzer, created a Bureau of Decency and Fairplay at the New York World — that was the first newspaper ombudsman.

The early 1900s were critical for the growth and acceptance of accuracy in the North American press. Its evolution, Silverman claims, would influence other journalists around the world. Codes of ethics were adopted in newsrooms to guide reporters and editors. “The loud proclamations of the new profession of journalism — ethical, accurate and an essential part of free society — now came with academic and policy credentials to back them up.”

Silverman places errors in two categories — slips and mistakes. Slips, the most common of factual errors, occur because of “brainlock.” They are preventable. Mistakes are the direct result of conscious, incorrect decisions. “Journalists have their own internal thought processes, biases and inherent failings. In addition, they are pushed by editors, pulled by sources, harangued by critics, pressed by deadlines, and stifled by lack of resources. The tools they use every day in their work are often filled by error traps and other latent conditions that can subvert even the most conscientious worker. That errors are so common in journalism is not a shock; they are indeed part of human existence.”

A 1936 newspaper accuracy study revealed that misspelling of names and titles was the most common factual error. A study, 70 years later, in 2005, showed some improvement, but these were still the most common errors. The information is easily available and these slips are therefore inexcusable.

Silverman cites what he calls a “legendary” correction from The Australian:

A story headlined “Syria seeks our help to woo U.S.” in Saturday’s Weekend Australian misquoted National Party senator Sandy

Macdonald. The quote stated, “Syria is a country that has been a

bastard state for nearly forty years,” but should have read, “Syria is a country that has been a Baathist state for nearly forty years”

The Australian regrets any embarrassment caused by the error.

The most common errors, which can also be hilarious, are typos — journalists do not notice them, but readers do — as the experience of The Hindu shows. A large number of messages we receive daily pertains to wrong spellings, including in the headlines. Spell checks have been the cause of many typos, says Silverman.

The Associated Press had this correction:

In a March 20 story about a World Water forum, The Associated Press

erroneously described Gana Unnayan Sangstha as an aid worker. It is

the name of a non-governmental organisation in Bangladesh that one

of the participants in the forum was associated with.

Regret the Error: How media mistakes pollute the Press and imperil free speech, Craig Silverman, Union Square Press, an imprint of Sterling Publishing Co. Inc. $19.75.

(To be concluded)

Stories in this Section

Mission perfect
Only the first step
Coming to terms with Barack Obama
India and the G-20 Washington summit
Which McCain will return to Senate?
Arkansas blocks adoption by unmarried couples
Spain expels Osama’s son
Obama’s victory
Cause for concern
System vulnerabilities, human failings

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu