I never went to journalism school, and I do understand that ethics are different in different countries
I am getting a little tired of people bitching out journalists while buying into all the shite available on the Internet
Case 1: I was sent a link this morning to a song "In God We Still Trust" that my correspondent AND friend believed had been banned by the current U.S. government. I looked it up, and found it was (yet another) Internet boondoggle, and sent the Snopes link back. AFTER reading all the abuse against journalists who didn't report this.
Case 2: The Huffington Post (in this case PFC Manning, but . . . ): Even without the school, anyone with even half a wit should know to "consider your sources."
What does this person/writer/interlocutor have to gain from me believing this?
What proof are they showing me?
Have they proven themselves to be truthful in the past?
Do they have an agenda? (I almost typed "hidden agenda" but this is huffpo - it's not hidden.)
Case 3: Westboro Baptist Church
OK, I agree that these people are douchebags, and many of us would like nothing more than to beat on their sorry asses.
BUT (yes, that word again), are you really sure that the tales you're hearing about them being run out of ***** (I've had it sent to me with numerous towns and numerous soldiers/sailors/airmen) are true?
Are you sure you are not actually doing their recruiting for them by spreading this? (That danged First Amendment again - I hate these guys, but I cannot support a beat-down for what they say. I would rather, IF I were an American and such things applied, stand arm-in-arm with the Patriot Guard and be louder in our silence.)
I work, sometimes, as a journalist. I'm probably a little slap-happy about it because it isn't a calling for me. I apologize for that, but I try to only do "fluffy bunny" stuff. I have worked with and follow "real" journalists, and get incensed when the same people that send me this Web-based shite talk down the profession.
What did you do to uncover the truth today?