Showing posts with label finding sources. Show all posts
Showing posts with label finding sources. Show all posts

Fake News: The Importance of Reliable Sources

Wednesday, September 11, 2019
Recently I was listening to a panel discussion on writing young adult nonfiction. Participants were asked about doing research in the age of fake news. I literally laughed out loud when I heard that phrase. Clearly the moderator thought of fake news as a contemporary problem. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Sefton Delmer was a British journalist who created fake radio news broadcasts to demoralize loyal Nazis. His work is considered fake news vs. espionage because he didn't work for the military or government. Read his story here in the Smithsonian magazine.

During the Civil War, the New York Herald reported that George Washington's remains had been removed from Mt. Vernon. The paper was forced, by the Mount Vernon Association, to print a retraction. You can read that story, on the Mount Vernon web site, here.

In 1835, The New York Sun even published a story about the discovery of life on the moon. There were even illustrations of humanoids with bat like wings. See that story that includes this fake news account as well as nine more at the Social Historian.

My point is that we treat fake news like it is something new, an Internet phenomenon. Rumors and lies are just as easy to find in print, both contemporary and historic, as they are to find online. That is why it is so important to learn to do solid research. Here are four tips to help you find more accurate material.

1. Pay attention to your sources. The Smithsonian is going to be a more reliable source than The Enquirer. That's an extreme dichotomy but I hope you see what I mean. A publisher or publication with a reputation for accurate work is going to work to maintain that reputation.

2. Pat attention to your authors. An anonymous piece is going to be less trustworthy than something by a noteworthy journalist for the same reason that a reliable publisher is more accurate. Also pay attention to the author’s expertise. A historian will likely know more about history than economics unless they are an economic historian.

3. Multiple sources. Look for multiple sources on your topic. This isn't full proof because ten sources that all get an incorrect fact from the same place will still be wrong even if they agree. That's why it is important to look for different types of and even competing sources. When you can find competing press that agrees about something, it is more likely to be fact.

4. Recent sources. A retraction or correction will be more recent. So try to find materials produced over a period of time including those created more recently. Recent scientific findings can also make a big difference even if your topic is history. Genetics are making a big impact in a wide variety of fields.

Good research takes a lot of work. As you do your research, remember that biased sources have always been a problem. The more research you do, the more likely you are to have an accurate picture of an event, person or topic even if your topic is fake news.

--SueBE

To find out more about Sue Bradford Edwards' writing, visit her blog, One Writer's Journey.  Sue is also the instructor for Writing Nonfiction for Children and Young Adults. The next session begins September 23rd, 2019.
Read More »

Sage Advice for Avoiding Interview Mishaps

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Mark Twain quipped, "Whenever you give an interviewer a fact give him another fact that will contradict it. Then he'll go away with a jumble he can't use at all."

Twain's humorous take on interview skills leaves freelancers wondering about the craft of conferencing. Do unwritten rules exist about securing an expert interview prior to sending a query? What if an interviewee demands to read - and edit - your piece prior to publication?

Check out these interview scenarios and learn how to avoid interview pitfalls.

The scenario: You devise a brilliant idea for an article and now, you're stuck. Is it best to find an expert first or submit the query and then look for a source?
The advice: In my experience, it depends on the story and the publication I'm pitching. But, I have found that if I approach an expert source and explain that the article is in the query stage, they're more than willing to give me enough information so the pitch stands out. Then, if I need additional information once the query gets the green light, I conduct an in depth interview.
The scenario: What's the best way to conduct the interview? Take notes? Type on my mini laptop? Audio record? Videotape?
The advice: It depends. If I'm on a phone interview and at my desk, I'll transcribe throughout the interview. A digital audio recorder works great, but double check battery levels before beginning. I'll never forget the one time I started an interview and the batteries died within 15 minutes. No backups. A three hour interview. With the increase in multimedia in journalism, a video of the interview can be useful, too. Find what works best for you in each situation, and always get permission to audio or video record.
The scenario: You're on a deadline and want to conduct a phone or live interview. Your source wants you to send an email list of questions and will respond "at her earliest convenience."
The advice: This is a tough one because it depends on the window before the clock strikes deadline and you turn in a late assignment. (Remember what happened in school when you handed in late homework?) If I have most of the legwork completed and just need to plug in quotes, I would go ahead and send the email. Try to accommodate your source. But, if I know time is of the essence, I'll explain my position to the interviewee and try to reach a compromise. If the source wants her name included in the article, she usually finds a way to make the process work in her best interest.
The scenario: You locate a wonderful source and she offers a wealth of insight and fantastic quotes. But, she has a new book/magazine article/TV appearance/radio interview coming out that's not on topic and she's hinting at a free publicity plug in your article.
The advice: Tricky situation. What if I need to contact the source again and I haven't mentioned her work? Or, should I risk my professional integrity by promoting a piece of work or appearance unrelated to the topic? Again, the variables dictate the choice, but I focus on work that relates to my subject. (And I haven't lost a source yet!)
The scenario: You write your article. Now, the expert wants to peruse it.
The advice: Consult your editor. Since I've been freelancing, only once source has requested to read an article prior to print. That publication had a policy against letting a source view the story before it hits the press. Another writer friend will send paragraphs including the source's quotes but not the entire piece.
The scenario: Interview complete. Article submitted and printed. Has my responsibility ended?
The advice: I always send a handwritten thank you note after an interview. It's just a personal touch that I like to add. It's PR that says I care about my career and it makes a great impression. Once an article is printed, I either send a link for online articles or I make a copy and put it in the mail. Like I previously mentioned, you never know when you may need to contact this source again.
Interviewing isn't an exact science. Each situation differs and a seasoned writer knows what methods work best.
And those facts will untangle the jumbled mess Twain humorously described.
by LuAnn Schindler. Find more of LuAnn's writing at http://luannschindler.com.
Photo from Flickr Creative Commons by mrgilles.
Read More »
Powered by Blogger.
Back to Top