For all its faults, the news media has and continues to uncover major scandals, such as Watergate, through Woodward and Bernstein (who were just local reporters at the time) and Enron (uncovered by two Wall Street Journal reporters, Rebecca Smith and John Emshwiller. Without their reporting, the Enron scandal almost certainly would not have come to light when it did and conceivably might never have surfaced).
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
henry6 Ulrich henry6 Checking facts and reporting truth used to be a badge of honor and high attainment in the field of journalism. Today it is how well you apply your make up and if your tie is straight or if your story cost less to present in the paper than another's story which is taking several more hours to fact check. I'm sure fact checking is now more important than ever... much more so than in days gone by because today the average reader or viewer has the ability to check and verfy and cross check with other sources with the click of a mouse. The reporting biz is so much more competitive today because readers and viewers have so many sources to choose from.. It certainly is more important. But done less because of not enough time or untrained people handling.
Ulrich henry6 Checking facts and reporting truth used to be a badge of honor and high attainment in the field of journalism. Today it is how well you apply your make up and if your tie is straight or if your story cost less to present in the paper than another's story which is taking several more hours to fact check. I'm sure fact checking is now more important than ever... much more so than in days gone by because today the average reader or viewer has the ability to check and verfy and cross check with other sources with the click of a mouse. The reporting biz is so much more competitive today because readers and viewers have so many sources to choose from..
henry6 Checking facts and reporting truth used to be a badge of honor and high attainment in the field of journalism. Today it is how well you apply your make up and if your tie is straight or if your story cost less to present in the paper than another's story which is taking several more hours to fact check.
Checking facts and reporting truth used to be a badge of honor and high attainment in the field of journalism. Today it is how well you apply your make up and if your tie is straight or if your story cost less to present in the paper than another's story which is taking several more hours to fact check.
I'm sure fact checking is now more important than ever... much more so than in days gone by because today the average reader or viewer has the ability to check and verfy and cross check with other sources with the click of a mouse. The reporting biz is so much more competitive today because readers and viewers have so many sources to choose from..
It certainly is more important. But done less because of not enough time or untrained people handling.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
It's not just railroads, and it's not anything new. I work in the homebulding industry. You would think that with a strong Homebuilder's Association with 500 plus members, that it wouldn't take too long to double check things. You'd be wrong. Going back about 20 years ago, our local paper, had a front page photo of the front door of a house. The headline read: "One of only 3 houses being built in the city". The story was about how the coldest January in a long time was affecting the building trades- including the fact that only 3 home building permits had been issued that January. I protested to the reporter, and to the newspaper editor, that had the photographer turned around, he could have taken photos of 19 other homes under construction. The editor said that perhaps the reporter "had missed the mark a bit", but that it didn't warrant any kind of correction as far as the newspaper was concerned. Anymore, I figure it doesn't matter much what's in the paper. No one reads it.
Sam1The news media today is as vibrant as ever. It has shifted, however, from a paper to an electronic delivery platform. That does not make it inherently less accurate. There is no evidence that there is more misreporting today than there was 50 years ago. Except in the minds of old folks who remember what they want to remember and engage in a age old past time, i.e. extolling the virtues of a long ago past that was never quite as good as they would like to remember it.
I grew up in Altoona, which was the home of the heavy works of the PRR, and it was a crew change point for all freight and passenger trains passing through Altoona.
The Altoona Mirror, which was the major paper when I was growing up, reported daily on railroad events. It had management and reporters who knew the railroad's management and employees. They lived amongst them as friends and neighbors. As I remember it they usually got the story correct.
Outside of places like Altoona railroads don't make that big a splash. Accordingly, most news outlets don't have the resources to develop the expert insights found amongst the news people in Altoona. Or found amongst them when I was growing up in the 50s. They are dependent on sources to give them good information. If the sources get it wrong or bias the information, that is the way it is likely to appear in the new media.
The news media today is as vibrant as ever. It has shifted, however, from a paper to an electronic delivery platform. That does not make it inherently less accurate. There is no evidence that there is more misreporting today than there was 50 years ago. Except in the minds of old folks who remember what they want to remember and engage in a age old past time, i.e. extolling the virtues of a long ago past that was never quite as good as they would like to remember it.
Zardoz, I know of at least two rail magazines that print corrections. As for the magazine you're probably referring to, the corrections they print often fail to address even half of the errors they've published. Sometimes, they're probably oblivious to certain errors. But other times, they've been informed of errors and chose not to clarify them among the readers. In years past, the letters section of that magazine and others like it used to be an appropriate place for printing lengthy clarifications submitted by readers. Nowadays, those letters sections tend to be used more for cheerleading.
One thing that gets my goat about TV reporting is interviewing the locals who have no idea about what they are speaking and presenting it as fact.
Norm
In past years I owned and bred racing Greyhounds. I loved the dogs and I loved watching them run.
Animal rights people regularly fed false stories to the media about how we mistreated our dogs. The media types would just run with what they were told, often never bothering to even contact anyone in Greyhound racing to get our side of the story.
A certain national cable network, owned by a major broadcast network, and then headquarted in Ft. Lee, NJ, did a two part hit piece on us. They claimed to show poorly treated racing Greyhounds. One problem, the dogs they showed were not racing Greyhounds. Not all greyhounds are racing dogs. The breed came to the Great Plains as a working breed to help farmers and ranchers control rabbits and coyotes. They're still used for coyote control today. The dogs shown on CNBC were not racing dogs. But the network used them to slam racing. Greyhound racing has stringent rules requiring humane treatment. People who are found to violate these rules get a life time ban from racing.
Now if you want a real experience in being treated as garbage, call up a national network and explain why the dogs they falsely portrayed as racing Greyhounds were not racing Greyhounds. Even if you own racing dogs, the network nit wits believe they know more than you do.
After several months of writing letters I did get a response. The network had not checked to see if any of the dogs ever went to racing. But they never publically admitted it. (The dogs were not registered, and you cannot race an unregistered greyhound. The registration process is a strict, three step process. There is no plausible way the dogs shown could have ever raced. They were coyote chassers and they had nothing to do with Greyhound racing.)
That didn't matter to the network. And it had nothing to do with lack of money on the network's part. It had everything to do with promoting an agenda at the expense of the truth and at the expense of a lot of good people who take very good care of their racing Greyhounds.
Want more stories of media malpractice? I've got 13 years of 'em to tell.
That's true to a point....It's very simple to check things like attendance records or ball game scores. But what about something more esoteric like city accounting records... improper writeoffs etc?... Reporters generally aren't accountants or experts in any one area and therefore quite often have to trust the source's expertise. This is especially true of small papers that don't have the resources of a large paper that can afford to hire specialist writers. A remember in my very short stint as a journalist I covered sports, the city beat, the police beat, the science beat, the business beat.. the schoolboard...etc.. You can say "check your facts" but don't forget that there are also time deadlines.. I had to get my stuff written up in a couple of hours...this was before the internet, and there was no easy way to double check sources. Maybe if you write for a monthly magazine where deadlines are less frequent, but if you write for a daily paper you're expected to have it all done and ready for printing within hours. I wasn't half bad at it..its the embellishment and outright fabrication of facts that got me into trouble...but it was a long time ago, and my stuff had humor and entertainment value that the strictly factual stuff didn't have.. .
But it is supposedly up to a reporter to check facts and figures when given him, question his source, and seek the truth and the facts. "Joe Blow said there were 10,000 in attendance at the rally but I counted only 1000". Or "....but police say there were fewer than 5000" But it is up to you, the reporter to verify so that neither you nor your employer look stupid and inept and don't get sued.
If you want accuracy in journalism then limit yourself to reading the sports page and the obits... Journalists are often hampered by the fact that the people who they report on or interview also don't have a good grasp of the facts. I was a reporter for a short time when I was 20. I would regularly interview people who gave me bogus numbers and facts, and I would be the one to be called on it when some picky reader with lots of time on his hands got upset over the errors. Four months into my journalism career I got fired (I liked to juice up the news with fictitious people and quotes...oh well)..
CShaveRR [snipped- PDN] . . . Do everyday people care about this? Well, they should! If they're making erroneous statements about things basic to the railroads, who among us is to say that they aren't doing this about other things less important to us? Do the media distinguish among utility poles, or is everything a "telephone pole"? Wouldn't it be terrible if the media were as slipshod with political facts as they are with railroad facts? Oh, wait... . . .
Well, they should! If they're making erroneous statements about things basic to the railroads, who among us is to say that they aren't doing this about other things less important to us? Do the media distinguish among utility poles, or is everything a "telephone pole"? Wouldn't it be terrible if the media were as slipshod with political facts as they are with railroad facts? Oh, wait... . . .
dakotafred [snipped - PDN] . . . Their ignorance of railroading -- which naturally jumps out at us -- is replicated in just about any subject they cover. That's why reporters are so often blank slates upon which their "sources" -- government officials, special pleaders of all sorts -- can write anything they like. And why, even when they are told something straight, they so often screw it up. Or a copy editor does it for them. . . .
I share the same sentiments - "What else are the media messing up, but where we can't figure out the errors as easily ?"
As a friend of my wife's said after seeing an episode of comedian and TV show host Jay Leno's "Jay-Walking" video clips: "We're doomed !" (as an informed and free society, then)
- Paul North.
Magazines, except maybe weekly news magazines, are different, usually to a very narrow and specialize audience. The rules are different, the calabre is different.. Cannot be compared with off the street highschool journalism.
At least a certain railroad-related publication still has the class to admit it's errors, and puts a "corrections" segment in the magazine.
cacole I'm sure all major newspapers have the same policies: Newsroom editors are salaried; reporters are paid on a commission basis. No stories, no pay.
I'm sure all major newspapers have the same policies: Newsroom editors are salaried; reporters are paid on a commission basis. No stories, no pay.
No. As noted elsewhere the problem is more prevalent in medium and smaller markets. When I was first hired in my present market in the mid to late 60's, it was in the top 100 and requirements were both a college degree and experience. Today, high schoolers are often hired, right off the street; news photography is often reader/viewer cell phone pix, and instead of having news contacts or making regular beat phone calls, public tip lines are used especially if the new people are not listening to scanners when something happens. Editors are often local reporters with seniority and not necessarily ability needed to be a good editor. Pay is usually state minimum wage and you are told how great you are and how the title "editor" will look next to your name. Its like the 20 year old becoming a store or fast food manager. As for stringers (those who send in stories) they no longer get paid but made to feel good because they get published while the really good writers don't bother anymore. Often the editor will rely on his/her staff even when a good story appears from the public.
Well brothers and sisters, I've been a firearms owner and enthusiast AND a National Rifle Association member for 40 years. What you folks have seen in the press concerning railroads and their knowledge of same (or lack therof) is just a TASTE of what us American shooters have been putting up with for decades. The sensationalism, the half-truths, and the flat out lies haven't been much fun, let me tell you.
Look, i like newspapers, I sincerely hope they don't die off, but sometimes I think they won't die from lack of use as much as they'll commit suicide.
Fred,
I'm glad you are retired and don't need to worry about your job. Actually I think we are lucky to have the relatively few remaining daily newspapers we have. I wonder how long they will last.
As a 20-year veteran of the newspaper biz (now retired), I'll tell you what the problem is, especially at mid-market media and smaller. The people hired there are young and low-wage; not just their life experience but their general knowledge is very slight. They tend to be journalism graduates. I don't know what schools of journalism do with them for four years, but they sure don't make them learn anything about history, science or even business math.
Their ignorance of railroading -- which naturally jumps out at us -- is replicated in just about any subject they cover. That's why reporters are so often blank slates upon which their "sources" -- government officials, special pleaders of all sorts -- can write anything they like. And why, even when they are told something straight, they so often screw it up. Or a copy editor does it for them.
Which is not to say there are not good reporters out there. But it's as important to be skeptical of anything you see in the paper or on TV as of a given source on the Internet.
Oh yeah, the editors are brought up from the ranks because it is cheap.
And, it is possible that some editor thinks he/she knows better than the reporter, and makes asinine changes. Last week, I noticed a column by a local writer had "garnish" where "garnishee" should have been used. I sent him a note, chiding him for the error--and he responded, saying that he had used the correct word, and some [ignorant] editor had changed it.
Johnny
tree68 Andrew FalconerThey even say absurd things like the Michigan Central railroad poorly chose their location when they built the tracks and yard by the Kalamazoo River because now it is prime land for riverfront development. Why am I reminded of the woman who called into a talk radio show complaining that the "Deer Crossing" signs should be moved to a safer location so not as many deer would be hit when they crossed there.....
Andrew FalconerThey even say absurd things like the Michigan Central railroad poorly chose their location when they built the tracks and yard by the Kalamazoo River because now it is prime land for riverfront development.
Why am I reminded of the woman who called into a talk radio show complaining that the "Deer Crossing" signs should be moved to a safer location so not as many deer would be hit when they crossed there.....
PNWRMNM I guess having a reporter get the facts straight is just too difficult. Mac
I guess having a reporter get the facts straight is just too difficult.
Mac
No. Too expensive. Takes from the bottom line.
Carl,
According to Wilipedia there is still one at Otsego and One at Allegan.
henry6 The news media...papers, radio and tv stations....are owned mostly by big investment companies whose' main purpose is to add up the projected sales figure by 4PM so that they can use the overnight money markets to have a tidy sum the next day to use to leverage for more buying of properties and to up their stock prices if not a privately held company. To do this they consolidate properties and staffs pushing the older and higher paid out while bringing in young and inexperienced, often recruiting off the street rather than from college campuses or move up from smaller markets or within the company. Supervisors are those who see the writing on the wall and leave to sell real estate or financial advice and stocks. Those left to do the work are given an 8 hour, Monday to Friday, usually 9-5 job with no overtime allowed and no one to edit or fact check.. Items released to the public either in newspaper or via broadcast stories, are what the reporter has received in his emails or via fax. He neither has the time nor the ability to fact check so the story goes as received. He is given a pat on the back and made Assistant Editor or assistant to the Assistant Editor. Reporters will often have to work more than one paper or station at a time and often, too, especially in broadcasting, more than one market at a time. Thus the morning news reader at a station in city A may be doing the afternoon newscast in city B hundreds or thousands of miles distant. Or maybe be doing the 6-9 morning on the east coast followed by the 6-9 morning on the west coast. So, overall, the news media ownership doesn't care as long as they earn on their investment and those who work the news don't know how to care because they either aren't trained, aren't supervised, or don't have enough time between textings and twitterings. I can say all this after 50 years of being in the business and seeing it taken apart as I have described. So, as for railroading and railroads, unless you have a reporter who knows railroads and railroading, you're gonna get more "garages for trains" and the other idiocies we see and hear.
The news media...papers, radio and tv stations....are owned mostly by big investment companies whose' main purpose is to add up the projected sales figure by 4PM so that they can use the overnight money markets to have a tidy sum the next day to use to leverage for more buying of properties and to up their stock prices if not a privately held company. To do this they consolidate properties and staffs pushing the older and higher paid out while bringing in young and inexperienced, often recruiting off the street rather than from college campuses or move up from smaller markets or within the company. Supervisors are those who see the writing on the wall and leave to sell real estate or financial advice and stocks. Those left to do the work are given an 8 hour, Monday to Friday, usually 9-5 job with no overtime allowed and no one to edit or fact check.. Items released to the public either in newspaper or via broadcast stories, are what the reporter has received in his emails or via fax. He neither has the time nor the ability to fact check so the story goes as received. He is given a pat on the back and made Assistant Editor or assistant to the Assistant Editor. Reporters will often have to work more than one paper or station at a time and often, too, especially in broadcasting, more than one market at a time. Thus the morning news reader at a station in city A may be doing the afternoon newscast in city B hundreds or thousands of miles distant. Or maybe be doing the 6-9 morning on the east coast followed by the 6-9 morning on the west coast. So, overall, the news media ownership doesn't care as long as they earn on their investment and those who work the news don't know how to care because they either aren't trained, aren't supervised, or don't have enough time between textings and twitterings. I can say all this after 50 years of being in the business and seeing it taken apart as I have described.
So, as for railroading and railroads, unless you have a reporter who knows railroads and railroading, you're gonna get more "garages for trains" and the other idiocies we see and hear.
I was half-tempted to start a parallel thread titled "Inaccurate (Rail-Oriented) Magazine Stories About Railroads, but there aren't enough hours in the day for me to list all the instances I've seen. Most of it boils down to what the o.p. and others described as writers who are unfamiliar with the territory or time frame or subject matter they're attempting to cover. It can be as blatant as a map of a famous mountain pass showing snowsheds in all the wrong locations, or as subtle as a botched reference to Southern Pacific ice decks as being "ice docks."
I used to be an avid subscriber to a magazine... (well... I'll be kind and not name the magazine, but it was focused on all things Scientific in America) and I devoured all the articles, and felt like I knew a lot about many different scientific subjects because of what I had read in the pages of that magazine.
Then they had an article about something that I really DID know a lot about... Computers! At the time I was working in that field for my occupation and had designed computer circuits for my hobby endeavours.
What a load of horrible malarky was in that article! I was STUNNED!
If what I knew about nuclear energy was anything like that article taught about computers, you'd do well to run for the hills if I ever got near a power plant.
If what I knew about hybredization of corn or beans was anything like that article taught about computers, if I became a farmer, you would do well to stop eating completely!
If what I knew about aerodynamics was anything like that article taught about computers, if I was even a passenger in an airplane, you'd do well to nail your feet to the ground --- in a cave.
If what I knew about sailing the bounding main was anything like that article taught about computers, if I even got near the sea shore, you'd do well to just pull the plug in the ocean's drain and let all the water out.
BUT...
That was not the article that caused me to cancel the subscription... the article about how birds know which berries are edible and which are poisonous is what did it. One page had a 4 panel drawing in silhouette form... the 1st panel was of a twig with 3 berries on it. The next panel showed a bird (from the outline I'd guess it was a Cardinal or Blue Jay) on the twig eating one of the berries. The next panel was of just the bird on the twig, and the last panel showed the bird regurgitating the berries, bent over with large tear drop shaped spots coming from it's open beak. The silhouette of a barfing bird is what finally grossed me out. I still have to stiffle a laugh when I see the magazine in the racks at stores.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.