So, the thing that seperates journalists from the blogger pack is reliability, accuracy, research and fact-checking, right?
So, how come this happens?
"Girl with a One Track Mind" blogger and author Zoe Margolis has said she is taking legal action against the Independent on Sunday after she was referred to as a "hooker" in a headline.
Note to subs: Girl with the One Track Mind and Belle de Jour are different blogs...
Still, that sort of mistake is a one off, right? Wrong.
Despite us patiently explaining who we were and why we were there ITN's "journalist" and idiot Phil Reay-Smith went on to describe the Whingers as "die hard Phantom fans". Lawyers have been advised as this is clearly defamation of the most serious kind.
Only one response is possible:
/facepalm
interesting that in the Margolis case, and the Daily Mail/Facebook case (http://www.journalism.co.uk/2/articles/537858.php), the errors seem to have occurred in the editing process, rather than at the writing stage.
It is, isn't it?
Some journalists seem to show an almost wilful ignorance of social media - as if learning about it or fact checking it for a story would in some way legitimise it...
Oh dear. Did we really call Phil Reay-Smith an "idiot"? We meant "three kinds of idiot"
Re: wilful ignorance of social media, it is interesting that according to the press coverage of this brouhaha the correct term for anyone doing anything online including contributing to an online discussion forum is "blogger". Discuss.
It's become the journalist equivalent of the Roman use of "barbarian" - them lot, who aren't like us....
There are bloggers at the gates.