Posts tagged accuracy

Submission to Leveson

November 30, 2011 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , , , ,

Well, its done – and a big thank you to all those who a) offered and b) actually provided help in turning this from a pathetic word doc to a spanking pdf. 🙂

The paper can be downloaded from this site…and you are welcome to do so and to use material contained in it for your own work and research.

And thanks to Andrea for some of the research (particularly on the evolution of press cover of trans costs) and possibly for her advice (er, orders!) on document formatting and layout. I believe the term is “designer with attitude”.

I have today sent off to the Leveson Inquiry my potted history of recent complaints about press accuracy in respect of three quite key trans stories – and the lessons that may be drawn more widely from the way in which the press have dealt with those stories.

Broadly: they tend to reach for the nearest rentaquote, rely on other press for key facts (so once an incaccuracy is introduced into the mix, it is hard to drive it out again, as it is quickly redistributed through multiple publications, all relying on the original).

They are also slow to react, and exceedingly defensive of text once it is published.

This is odd – or maybe not: the press is quite capable of getting a news item up in minutes, and, before it is published, it is usually desperate for sources to “stand up” a story. Once up, the press usually takes weeks to consider any factual criticism of a story – and they tend to wriggle and twist at every turn in order to reject new – often better qualified – outside information.

Last but by no means least, the PCC is something of a damp squib in this respect.

The paper details ways in which the PCC appears to match the press in wriggliness: specifically, in respect of one complaint, defending the journalist because at one point they had NOT used a specific word, so could not be accused of implying it; while at another, in respect of a literal inaccuracy (where another different and inaccurate word was used) claiming that of course the average reader would have understood what the writer meant.

Disingenuous? Or just incapable of adding two and two and making four?

The big idea

Last but by no means least, the paper includes a radical suggestion: other bodies – such as the Internet Watch Foundation and British Board of Film Classification go to some lengths to include external input in order to “moderate” their decisions. Basically, check they are doing what they are meant to be doing.

Not so the PCC.

One of their key duties is to determine whether a piece is misleading or inaccurate. I have in the past suggested that they actually survey members of the public to divine what impression they had gained from a particular piece, since only in that way could they tell what had been taken from it, and whether or not it had been misleading.

But no: such an idea is met with pained incredulity…as though i had proposed an indecent act involving Lord Dacre’s maiden aunt and a goat. When it comes to understanding what the public has understood from a piece of writing, the PCC declares that it knows best – and the very idea of involving the public… well, honestly!

Out of touch? Much!

Jane
xx

Comments (2) »

The only way is (without) Ethics

November 16, 2011 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

I get the feeling that today is going to make me cross. Very. And i will probably end up getting in trouble with my fellow journo’s again.

However, am i the only person starting to get seriously sick of this vindictive and, in the end, pointless obsession by the family of a homicide victim?

Simple story. Back in 2000, Robert Page killed Clive White in the course of a bungled burglary. The killing was particularly vicious – and there can be little sympathy for the perpetrator. Initially convicted of murder and sentenced to life in 2001, Page’s crime was marked down to manslaughter on appeal two years later.

Not clear what the tariff was at that point – though technically it could be longer than the original.

Even then, there were rumblings about the possibility that Page was (repressed) trans of some form – and in the years since, that fact has bloomed, to the point where Page is now taking hormones, called Emma and en route to grs. Possibly. As all of those who have gone thru the system know: there is no certainty of that until it is pretty much done.

Family outrage

In between times, the victim’s family claim to have been told that Page would never be allowed to transition. That’s bad. No professional psych would breach confidence in that way: whereas if police or probation officers were saying that, one really has to question their judgment…pronouncing on mental health issues in which they have no expertise and no direct involvement.

Clive’s brother is up in arms, having been alerted recently to Page’s progress thru the system by a well-balanced story in the People (er…that was sarcasm!).

Apart from just wanting Page to hang – which would be a novel development for manslaughter – they are also jumping on the bandwagon of prisoners not being allowed treatments “like this”.

Not too clear like what: presumably prisoners should get SOME medical attention. But for all i sympathise with the individuals concerned, they are a graphic example of why victims and their relatives should be involved in the judicial process – but that involvement does not give them expertise in the law or other specialised matters.

Yellow Press

Well, the family outrage is understandable, though perhaps becoming just a bit shrill.

Less forgiveable is the press response. I’ve been tracking the cost figure in the story since it appeared (£45k for grs: £200 per week for hormones) and, when i can, sticking an oar in and asking for it to be changed.

It is very clear that the press does not have any reason to print that – beyond the fact that the People put that figure up in the first place and therefore that allows some of the cleverer journo’s to write that Clive’s brother “has been informed the op will cost £45k” (you see what they did there: not technically inaccurate, even if the end result is).

But overall, the more i grapple with this cost issue, the more disgusted i am with the newspapers. Its the defensiveness that gets me.

It is absolutely clear that 9 out of 10 papers have not done any hard research on this figure. Each one is following the previous, slavishly. So, if journalism was genuinely about the truth, you’d think they’d be happy to put the facts straight.

But no: call after call is leading to nit-picking defence based around the phrasing used. IN some cases, if one is utterly literal, it is clear that no inaccuracy has been printed: but the impression given is plainly inaccurate.

ANd what is beginning to grate, and why i am going to be losing my rag later today is: they mostly don’t care. Mostly they prefer to defend what they have done, than admit…concede even that they might, just, possibly have got things wrong.

jane
xx

Comments (8) »

PCC again

November 1, 2011 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , ,

Just whizzed in three complaints to the pcc in respect of the £60,000 figure quoted by national papers. Sadly neither the STar nor the Express are now subject to the pcc, so little to be done about those apart from contacting them directly and suggesting they correct inaccuracies.

And will be sending in complaints in respect of every story quoting the £60k figure i can find. And no reason for others not to do same.

However, you need to understand very clearly what the pcc can accept. If you are the subject of a story, you have quite extensive rights when it comes to complaining, including objecting to malice and stories that appear to be discriminatory.

Otherwise, however, about your only ground is “inaccuracy”, which appears in clause 1 of the editor’s code of conduct: and you need to be very clear as to how the statement you complain about is inaccurate.

If the paper can show a source for their inaccuracy, and there are ANY grounds for suggesting that source might have standing on the topic, then the paper is off the hook. So… “trannies eat babies” would almost certainly get done for inaccuracy (though given how the press wrigle, i really wonder).

However, “Phillip ExpensesClaim, MP, says: ‘trannies eat babies'” is unassailable – unless you know for a fact he never said it.

The in-between option – “man in pub says, etc.” – is a tricky one.

In this case, papers giving £60,000 as a cost for a procedure that most of us know full well costs a fraction of that seems to be a material inaccuracy and should be changed.

I gave the nationals a day or so to get their arses into gear, though maybe shouldn’t even have done that.

There is a strong case for complaining about each and every story in this figure appears. Why? Well, first off, every single story where this figure appears is an instance of a lazy journalist not checking a fact, but instead just going to the cutting files and taking the highest figure last quoted.

So if the Sun gets it wrong ten times, that is ten mistakes, ten inaccuracies…not one…and i shall strenuously resist any attempts to reduce it to a single count.

Second, a pcc complaint has two outcomes at the paper complained of: first, its a load of bureaucracy for the journalists concerned. Am i upset by that? Nah. Given the upset that some journos cause to the trans community, no qualms whatsoever about making some of them put in a couple of horus extra to answer for their slapdashness.

Also, though, it notches up a count and moves the paper up a league table of “most-complained about”. If it is the case (as i suspect it is) that the Sun has used this figure six to ten times over the last couple of years, then i am very much hoping to see them add a tally of 6 to 10 to their total of upheld complaints.

That does their reputation no good at all…and is at one level quite satisfying for the rest of the community.

Jane
xx

P.S. Anyone wishing to make a complaint, just hie themselves over to the pcc site and read the code…basically, par 1

Comments (1) »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started