When I started writing this blog more than 3 years ago, it was in response to traditional media‘s habit of twisting interviews to fit the headlines they wanted to create. Major newspapers and TV News outlets were given the benefit of the doubt when it came to credibility. I wanted to believe that there was a goal of getting the facts right that extended as far as the sports and entertainment pages. I actually thought that by posting email exchanges that were the basis of articles, media would respond by increasing their efforts to get the story right. Their fact checking would become more stringent.
Less than a year later, I questioned who had higher standards, bloggers or traditional media like the NY Times and used this blog to give another example of conclusion intersecting with an interview to create an article. I wrote the blog posts because I still wanted to believe that traditional media had every reason to maintain their integrity as a differentiation from bloggers.
That was then, 2005. Its much different today. Today, the story is the asset. Credibility. Integrity. Get the story right. Each are concepts of a bygone era. The fact that these elements of big media are gone are proofed in the most simple of lines in a newspaper or TV crawl.
Today in the Transactions section of the sports page of the Dallas Morning News, I read that Chauncey Billups agreed to sign a deal with the Detroit Pistons. This is the simplest of questions. Its completely binary. Either he did or he didn’t, Its in the most throwaway of all sections of the sports pages and the newspaper itself. There is no incremental value to readers or the paper to have this tidbit in the paper. Its not a scoop. Its not going to sell papers. Yet the Morning News proved it didnt care enough to get the answer to a Yes or No question correct.
Wanna bet they just pulled this as fact from a sports blog ?
****UPDATE ** as of this morning i read on this Justin Rogers’ blog just how the “signing” of Billups became fact, According this report it was a beat writer on talk radio that “reported the signing” after which it was reported through various outlets as fact. So if this blog is accurate, (I dont have the time or inclination to fact check for this element ) would have lost my bet that it came from a blog, but the fact that the Morning News reported this in their transactions section without taking the very simple step of calling the player’s agent as Justin did, just further confirms my point that accuracy is no longer part of the program for many in media. *****
Thats the simplest example I could find, but there are many.
Today traditional media uses blog posts as authoritative. If its written in a blog, it must be true. This creates the opportunity to create “single source” stories. Get one interview, read an interview of the same person on a blog and use that as “confirmation” that whatever your source told you is true
Its actually pretty amusing that daily newspapers with hundreds of thousands of readers per day have so little regard for their credibility that they will use as a resource, blogs that are probably only read by the author, a few friends and the media person who found it in a search
Here is a newsflash, 99.9 percent of blogs are long tail and have fewer than 25 readers per post.. They write because they can.
It creates a lot of humorous situations that entertain at least me.
The past few weeks one of my former employees wanted to make a statement about our legal relationship and get his perspective covered in the media. No problem at all. The media people he spoke to asked me for a comment. I didnt give one. One media outlet wrote it as fact, then bloggers jumped in. The more bloggers jumped in covering what the other bloggers had to say about what the first bloggers said.
When I asked a local “reporter” why he was covering this when he only had one side and he knew i wasnt going to give a response, he said it was because his “editors thought it had become a national story”, I guess his bosses read blogs.. Then another media outlet, despite my no comment email response decided to take responses from months ago and present them in their story as if they were made in response to their current request. Nice.
Then several media national news organizations decided it was a story to be put on the wires. My favorite was the AP headline of “Cuban Claims….” then went on to say that neither I, nor the Mavs would respond to an email request. Next in the humur line were the typical talk radio idiots with the “Just Shut Up ” stuff. One of my buddies emailed and asked me how I would like for him to vote. I guess No Comment doesn’t work anymore.
Sports media is not alone in this. One of the cable news networks was having fun with me after I had done an interview with them. Now they could have just used the interview material they had, but instead, each time they presented the story they created, my role in the story changed just a little bit. Their producers would email me, i would tell them that i had nothing more to say. Then I would watch for their comments during various shows and each time, it morphed. At somepoint they must have gotten bored with it, or thought i was being too entertained at their expense, so they stopped covering it.
Thats how the media has evolved in 3 years. In 2004 they misused quotes. Today, they don’t even require quotes. They just make things up
57 thoughts on “Blogging’s impact on media credibility”
Hey Mark – we need a mockmark.blogspot.com site up ala Fake Steve Jobs – whaddayathink? Yep. Me too. It\’s up. Stay tuned for posts buddy – it\’ll be fun!
Comment by Mock Mark -
In the Summer of 1972, I was a sophomore journalism major at a state university and an intern reporter at United Press International. That was a dream job with union wages of $160.00 per week. It was \”back in the day\” when reporting for a news wire service required punching ticker tape, honesty and integrity.
The fact that I got this internship on my own very much angered the Dean of my Journalism School. He had seniors that couldn\’t graduate because of their need for an internship so he arbitrarily decided to disallow my 4 credit hours. The fact that the seniors had not applied for the job and I did was inconsequential. But, I digress.
The journalistic standards I was taught then do not seem to apply today. Now, the end justifies the means. Reporters are given the opportunity to publish their biases without the benefit of facts or balance.
This is encouraged or, at a minimum, condoned by editors publishers today. The facts are trumped by the media\’s agenda.
It used to be that only columnists, cartoonists and editorial writers could express their opinions. Now it\’s a free-for-all. So-called reporters now only broadcast/publish the facts that conform to their biases. The MSM is, in reality, no better than a blog. The world is on slant.
At the end of the day, integrity is either learned or not. I should have thanked the J-School Dean for disallowing my internship credits. I changed majors.
I would not be proud to be a reporter today. The once proud profession of news reporting has degenerated.
Comment by Jim -
Blogging has helped me really get my opinions trusted, for good and for bad. I write reviews and how-to articles every once in a while, and with just a little internet marketing what I say is trusted over more credible sources.
Comment by Jon Sanderson -
I started a blog a couple of years ago for one reason: to give the public an alternative to what I was reading in the mainstream media.
The subject matter of my blog (dog legislation) is not important to this discussion. The role of the media is.
During the years of researching my chosen subject, I had discovered that journalists were of three types: those who wanted to find out the truth (rare), those who didn\’t feel like working very hard (common), and those who had a specific viewpoint and intended to use their print space to promote that viewpoint (not uncommon).
Because of my own personal interest in the subject, I had done the research. I had read scientific studies, talked to bite victims and dog owners, and analyzed every piece of data I could get my hands on.
What I realized is that it was extremely rare to find, in the mainstream media, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Even in the cases of those reporters who had worked to find the truth, they were often hamstrung by their editors, who either had their own viewpoint or were paranoid about appearing biased, even if the truth itself supported the bias.
The crux of the problem came down to two things:
1. The choice, usually by the editors, of what stories to cover.
2. The facts (or lack thereof) within the stories.
I still don\’t know how to solve this. Without intending to preach about my particular issue (I\’m just using it as an example), I believe that problem #1 creates a public perception, for instance, that only certain types of dogs bite (or bite seriously). If only the incidents involving those types of dogs are covered, then the public and the politicians come to believe that those are the only dogs that are a problem.
Problem #2 simply exacerbates the first issue because, if the facts themselves are incorrect, that may influence the decision by the editors as to whether or not to print the story. For example, if the breed of dog has been misidentified, the story may be chosen or skipped based on that \”fact\” alone. And, when the story is printed, if the facts are incorrect, then the public perception is even further strengthened.
All of this perception is based on a decision by an editor, who is likely biased, and then on a regurgitation of old and incorrect information by a reporter who simply assumes that what another reporter wrote, often years earlier, was properly researched and considered.
As a blogger, I am careful to ensure that my facts do not come only from newspaper articles. I make phone calls, write letters and e-mails, and research actual studies, in order to ascertain the facts.
I\’d love to be able to write my articles within the mainstream media, where the number of readers vastly outnumbers those who read my blog. But, I can\’t envision myself researching the truth, writing it, and then having an editor with an agenda decide not to print it.
I\’d rather do it this way and hope that, eventually, those who do want to know the truth will find their way through the morasse of the Internet and stumble upon one of my posts.
Comment by Steve Barker -
Comment by Michele Mader -
It\’s a sad comment on the state of the 4th estate.
Comment by Glen Wilson -
SI getting jiggy with it.
Comment by San Jose -
While its nice to attack bloggers for something like this, isn\’t the fault more with main stream newspapers picking up and manipulating a story? Who gave bloggers the credibility to assume they were printing the truth without checking them first? The MSM members taht picked up the story and reported it as true. The vast majority of sports bloggers are guys sitting in their house who\’ve never even talked to the players they opine about, but no one gives them the credibility to assume the know inside informtion. On the other hand, large media outlets build their reputation out of the credibility, the sources they have, and the validity of their claims. That is what they are based off of, and that is their RESPONSIBILITY. This cannot be said for Joe Blow sitting in his house blogging.
I think you bring up great points when you talk about story manipulation however. MSM, and I have to point to ESPN in this situation because its the largest in sports, tends to frame for the juciest story besides the honest truth. They only care about viewers and ad revenue, not about the honest truth any more. They\’ll spin their story with misleading lead-ins…look at their coverage of the Mike Vick saga for instance. It\’s all fluff and no truth. The media is becoming a monster in terms of determining how they feel about certain people. And I bet in your case the reporter was probably a little tiffed about not getting a comment and decided to run with some assumptions. The media puts out a very negative impression of you a lot of times Mark, and you\’re just another victim in a long-line of them.
And to 41, please don\’t throw all blogs under the bus about shoddy fact finding and such. A lot of bloggers gain access through being credible and get to meet a lot of the players and actually get genuine sources within organizations. Some of the bigger ones, like the two Pistons blogs that our guy mentions, are really wonderful sites for specific, insightful, and knowledgable analysis of each team. They may not get exclusive interviews with the owner or GM, but that doesn\’t mean they\’re not incredibly valuable.
Comment by Ap -
Great article, thoughtful. I\’ve scrabbled out a few thoughts on how global convergence, too much power and information in the hands of too few, is impacting \”news\” and reducing it to infotainment. Wish I had the time to do a longer, more thoughtful article like yours.
Comment by Dianne -
Not all blogs just provide articles. I have run many over the years and putting step by step guides and lessons learnt along the way is a great way to make visitors come back. Thanks again for the good article,
Comment by Andrew -
I realize that this isn\’t related to this post but I\’m sure you know Kevin McClatchey stepped down today as the CEO of the Pittsburgh Pirates.
BUY THE PIRATES MARK!!! WE NEED YOU!!!!!!
A Lifelong Pittsburgh Sports Fan
Comment by AL -
How can you blame this on blogging? You\’re simply revealing the lack of credibility of mainstream journalists. They set standards that they don\’t keep.
Bloggers as a whole don\’t have standards other than those of the individuals. Some of us try to take the best of journalism\’s standards, others don\’t.
If you actually mean that blogging has helped expose mainstream journalism\’s failings, ok.
In that sense, blogging has deeply undermined mainstream media\’s credibility by forcing a lot of these issues out in the open.
I\’ve followed media\’s inaccuracies since the 70s, a lot of them perpetuated by really nice well educated people who meant well. On the issue of mainstream media\’s credibility, I have had absolutely no surprises since this Web thing took off.
Comment by Clyde Smith -
Credibility is important for a blogger. Authority is just as important, though.
Comment by billso -
This was a really enjoyable blog, Mark. I recently happened upon your writing, and I really like reading what you have to say. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. I\’m quickly becoming a fan.
Comment by Josephine M. -
Just wanted to say, it was nice seeing your cameo on The Loop the other night. Good job.
Comment by lauren -
We now have the opportunity to site our sources and demonstrate context by placing source files online. I\’ve been thinking a lot about this and thats what I\’m starting to do. By publishing source materials, some of us can prove we\’re more credible.
Comment by Branson Missouri -
Great blog Mark…its refreshing to see the truth on a blog….as bloggers…a good few of us try to get the whole story…and sometimes care more about getting it right. We had a situation this morning…with the Vanek offer sheet…we waited for the press conference before reporting the sheet was matched. It is just how we do things at The NHL Arena Program.
Comment by Chris -
media outlets care about their advertisers not their readers.. hence the crap that comes out of the observer, the dallas morning news, and all the clear channel stations..
Comment by cliffnotes -
Good stuff Mark. Now-a-days it seems like media outlets and bloggers strive to post information on the Web out of sheer boredom or just to incite some type of argument or debate with anyone, or everyone.
As for the validity of rumors that float around the Internet, is there any truth to your pal Todd Wagner having any interest in the Nashville Predators? It\’s been widely speculated that he has been in cahoots with local businessmen to keep the team in Nashville. I have not heard any concrete evidence from the man himself, but many are jumping to conclusions seeing that a billionaire (associated with one of pro sports bigger names in team ownership), buying property in the city\’s backyard means that the team will be staying put?
Our local media is pretty week and seldomly seems to have well researched work, so in that aspect I definitaly agree with your entry. It would be refreshing to finally see some decent journalism performed on a local level every once in awhile.
Comment by Aaron -
There are several things very wrong with your post.
\”I think that some bloggers can be some of the most knowledgeable NBA fans out there.\”
– A knowledgeable fan doesn\’t mean they have access to facts. There facts come from reporters, so your information is second hand, possibly third hand to begin with. Most blogs, outside of those of actual beat writers, are stating an opinion on information or opinion that is already out there.
\”Natalie from Need4Sheed.com might not have as much money as you, but I can almost guarantee that her site gets more visitors per day than yours does.\”
– I\’m guessing that\’s not accurate at all. Cuban has a fan base that transcends Maverick basketball. You and I ended up here right?
\”As a matter of fact, the \”Pistons insider\” who tipped off reporters that Billups did agree to a new contract wanted to remain anonymous because he already knew what he was saying was incorrect before he said it. He wanted to mess with the media so he gave out the false information.\”
– You don\’t know this, and you have nothing to back up this claim. In all likelihood, the source was close to negotiations, thought they were done, or close to being done, and relayed the information on to McCosky. To say it is a fact that someone was messing with the media is a foolish assumption.
\”And by the way, the only reason you are getting so worked up about this is because you more than likely want to offer Billups a boat load of cash to come play for Dallas once July 11th rolls around, am I right?\”
– Since you are so interested in getting facts straight so you won\’t look like a fool, you should probably look up how the salary cap works. Dallas is reportedly on the books for nearly $80 million next season, well above both the salary cap and luxury tax thresholds. The biggest contract Dallas can offer any player is the MLE, which starts around $6 million a year, with 8% raises, for up to five years. That\’s certainly not enough to lure Billups away from Detroit. The only way the Mavs could land Billups is a sign-and-trade, and there has been nothing to indicate that\’s even a remote possibility.
Comment by Justin -
Dear Mr. Cuban,
I myself am a blogger, and a Pistons blogger at that. Personally, I think that some bloggers can be some of the most knowledgeable NBA fans out there. Now I am speaking out of experience here, when a blogger writes a post they by no means want to be incorrect and sound like an idiot. Any serious NBA blogger digs as deep as they can to find as much info on a topic before they post anything about it. Look at Need4Sheed.com or DetroitBadBoys.com, these guys pull huge numbers of visitors from all around the Michigan area. They dont want to be giving out lots of false information and lose their fan base. And even the writers of these sites didnt know for sure if Chauncey Billups agreed to re-sign or not. And Natalie from Need4Sheed.com might not have as much money as you, but I can almost guarantee that her site gets more visitors per day than yours does. As far as the Billups \”did he sign or didn\’t he sign?\”, no one really can tell if what they read is true or not. Since there was no official statements by either the Pistons organization or Billups and his agent, no one can be one-hundred percent sure that what they know is legitimate. As a matter of fact, the \”Pistons insider\” who tipped off reporters that Billups did agree to a new contract wanted to remain anonymous because he already knew what he was saying was incorrect before he said it. He wanted to mess with the media so he gave out the false information. And by the way, the only reason you are getting so worked up about this is because you more than likely want to offer Billups a boat load of cash to come play for Dallas once July 11th rolls around, am I right? So don\’t blame the misconception of the media on us bloggers, blame it on the sources that give reporters information.
Comment by The Writer -
Just because there\’s only \”one side\” to a story doesn\’t mean it isn\’t a story.
In your example, your \”former employee\” made claims about you. Stop. That is a story. You chose not to comment on his/her claims. Stop. That is an element of the same story. If you choose to state \”your side\” of the story eventually, the original story will be updated accordingly.
It is easy for non-journalists to criticize journalists, just as it\’s easy for non-NBA-team owners to criticize NBA-team owners.
The Dallas Morning News guys didn\’t write the \”Transactions\” item you mentioned. It comes from The Associated Press, several times a day, and no paper has the resources to \”fact check\” every transaction. Did Chauncey Billups sign a contract, or did he agree to terms of a deal that he will sign at a later date? Does it really matter? Billy Donovan agreed to a deal with the Orlando Magic, signed a five-year contract, and then decided, \”Oops!\”
Maybe the papers should just stop covering the NBA, if its player transactions are not news.
Mark, you pulled a shift at a Dairy Queen once … maybe it\’s time you worked one night on a sports copy desk to see how easy it is to \”fact check\” everything.
Professor of Journalism
Valencia Community College
Former sports copy editor at The Plain Dealer (Cleveland), The National Sports Daily (deceased), The Tampa Tribune and The Orlando Sentinel
Comment by Ken Carpenter -
Just curious when you are coming back to Cayman Mark. I had heard from a friend down here that you had bought a place and he ran into you at a sporting goods store
Comment by Wesley -
Thanks for including my blog in your update Mark. It\’s more than appreciated. I especially enjoyed the (intentional) irony of the following statement considering the subject matter of the post.
\”(I dont have the time or inclination to fact check for this element )\”
Comment by Justin -
The thing that bothers me to no end about todays media is that we are no longer allowed to have opinions. I am all for anti-discrimination against races, sexual preferences, food choices, insects. But now due to the media if you say anything that remotely appears to be an opinion unfavorable towards cricket hating, you have to issue a formal apology and do community service.
Honestly! If youre a jerk, can\’t you be just that? Youre a jerk who hates Crickets. Ok, I\’m fine with that. Doesn\’t mean your right, but you SHOULD be entitled to your opinions and feelings.
Instead it appears; we have to teach our kids that hiding your true opinions and feelings is acceptable and that apologies mean nothing what so ever.
Comment by Jeff -
Not all bloggers report newsa few.
Comment by web -
Excellent work Mark. Rich Bucher had a good take on this the other day as well. It was a podcast and him and ESPN\’s Ric Bucher were discussing how powerful the media can be in determining an NBA player\’s public image. He basically said the media is a beast, and you can either choose what you feed to the beast, or if you choose not to feed the beast anything, the beast will take an arm or a leg, sometimes a head. Interesting stuff
Comment by Mark -
Hope your recovery is going well. Its tough to keep up with the little ones when you are on crutches.
Your comments just verify what my Mother told me over 30 years ago: Dont believe anything you read and only half of what you see.
Newspapers are a joke these days. The story doesnt make any difference as long as they are the first to report it (remember when a scoop could only be found in the daily paper?).
I dont read any blogs except yours. I read yours because, even though I am in my 60s, I have great respect for your success and I like to see what is happening with the latest of your involvements/investments.
Keep it up and disregard the idiots like PSC who love to criticize but should remember that old saying, It is better to remain silent and be thought dumb than tom open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Comment by Mike Genette -
No mention of Independence Day, the 4th of July? Well, here\’s something to put a smile on. A local parade, in Sunland-Tujunga, within the city of Los Angeles.
Titled: Sunland-tujunga 4th of july parade 2007
Comment by www.freeway2000.com -
Hey Mark, Hope the wheel is healing ok, Or that may have been something the media made up too. LOL. Really not sure any more but anyways, I am by no means an expert on media savy but from what I see most media, not only blogs but most media, the tube in our house and everything else is opinionated and one sided depending on who you watch and read about. IE Fox will always side with the big guy on the hill no matter what, So if you like to listen to someone that sides with him you watch Fox etc. You ll never hear ABC talk bad about the guys on the hill because they are owned by Disney who is one of George\’s bestest friends. Get it? Its just a matter of who you want to believe and entertain you. You have to be a really naive person and thats a polite way of saying it to beleive anything you read or see any more without looking to other sources for verification. One more thing. Im not a hundred percent sure on this but if my memory serves me correctly even your Danny got something wrong a few years ago during his last stint on CBS and he is one of the most credible guys in the news but it got by him. Me myself, I read this and a few other things for ENTERTAINMENT. Sometimes I giggle and sometimes Im WTF was that? Its mostly ENTERTAINMENT. Thanks for your thoughts.
Comment by Frankie from Lawnside -
So what is your response? To post on your blog that the news media is screwed up? Yes it is.. Do something about it..
Right wing radio calls it the \”liberal media\”. Left wing radio (15%?) calls it \”coporate conservative media\” or the \”Fake News\” instead of Fox News. But it is not limited to political agendas. In sports, it\’s the all out effort to get the first report. Right or wrong.
And there is lies (one of) the problem. Zero accountability.
If you are going to call yourself a news paper, or news station or news broadcast, please have the FCC define what \”news\” is and you must advertise it as such. (Except the FCC is run by the ex VP of something for the RNP.)
You are complaining about a societal problem. Why don\’t you take it upon yourself to champion this project. Get the problem out in the open on all the major channels. Have a crack staff investigate all the lies and twisting of truths that each top 5 watched \”news\” programs state and enlighten the public..
Or you can just sit back and relax.. But please stop whining.. It\’s annoying..
On a side note, I actually heard someone on ESPN radio agree with your take on fixing the lottery/draft system to balance the leagues and stop the tanking at the end of the season.
Let\’s just hope for the NBA\’s sake that Kobe AND the freak in MN go to the Eastern conference.
Comment by PSC -
I agree – traditional media has erred in responding to the blog threat. Instead of playing to their \”strengths\” (deeper, more thoughtful pieces with multiple sources and historical context), many have panicked and tried to compete with the long tail by jumping into the fray. A separate rant, but I characterize these guys as sports radio where all they do is talk about each other.
Media companies should be able to build a following of blogger crowd by exploiting their access and but not lose site of the larger prize – being the first place readers (and bloggers) go for the complete story, not just the headline.
And they need to protect the complete story from being ripped off by sploggers etc. Without this protection, the incentive to create the complete story goes away . . .
Comment by Rich Pearson -
islam zilzal zilzal-board kur\’an full ilahiler slam hakknda hersey..
Comment by zilzal-2 -
This is my first read of a Cuban blog. I was surprised by the number of typos and the poor sentence structure. That\’s why I like to read stories written by professional writers (see Big Media). Then I don\’t have to work my way through cumbersome prose and awkward phrasing.
Comment by Brady -
From the book \”We Interrupt this Newscast\”, just released
\”Local television newscasts around the country look alike and are filled with crime, accidents, and disasters. Interviews with more than 2,000 TV journalists around the country demonstrate that news looks this way because of the ingrained belief that eye-ball grabbers are the only way to build an audience. This book contradicts the conventional wisdom using empirical evidence drawn from a five-year content analysis of local news in more than 154 stations in 50 markets around the country. The book shows that how a story is reported is more important for building ratings than what the story is about. Local TV does not have to bleed to lead. Instead local journalists can succeed by putting in the effort to get good stories, finding and balancing sources, seeking out experts, and making stories relevant to the local audience.\”
Contradicts the conventional wisdom about what succeeds on television news
Describes a Magic Formula for ratings success for newscasts regardless of time slot, market size, level of competition, or network affiliation
Gives specific advice about how to craft news stories on particular topics, based on actual ratings data from 154 stations in a 5-year study Contains realistic advice from news practitioners about how to change the culture of a newsroom so that these ideas can be put into practice
Comment by Stephen Crowley -
they have been doing this for years..ever heard someone say,\”the new york times is reporting that so and so is committing an awful act\”,only to find out later they were talking about the editorial page. they were reporting opinion as news..it\’s done every day…
Comment by tom lewis -
I think this blog does a lot of good for you because people always expect to hear your side of things no matter what it is you are talking about. But now when you can\’t comment which is probably due to legal reasons, the blog hurts you a bit because people think you are not talking because you have something to hide. Knowing the competitor that you are, I knew there was no way in hell you would sue someone because they use to work for you and then beat you.
Comment by Joe McMackin -
this is by far some of your best writing in response to blogging as a whole. Even my family, namely my dear old aunt, has taken to blogging as a way to communicate with my family – she uses it to tell all of us how great she is and what we should all be going in our lives. She writes her column and then sends a blanket email to everyone she knows so EVERYONE can know the latest news. What is sad is she has a daughter that is in jail for the third time and the other daughter is a bit of garbage that lives off the government. My poor old aunt has been in a loveless marriage for 45 years on top of it, so I guess this is her moment in the sun by criticizing everyone else.
Blogs can be useful methods of communication for some, but I see them as a forum for most to soapbox their opinion. that is the #1 reason why BlogMaverick is the only one I go out of my way to look up. All others are just people writing crap.
Chad in Plano
Comment by chad duncan -
MC I agree with your thoughts in general here. While I\’m sure about what you think, I\’m not sure about how it makes you feel.
I hope it doesn\’t get to you or depress you at all and I hope your attitude is, \”Why would I give a f*** what some dope of a \’journalist\’ who couldn\’t even be bothered with fact checking thinks?\’
Comment by Robert Seidman -
Credibility means, believable. It doesn\’t matter what the source is, what matters is, is it the truth. Regardless if it\’s a topic on mowing the lawn or a war story, if its not truth then the source is not credible. You can\’t blur the lines to fit your outlook, if you do than the point in which this blog is predicated is then found true and credible!
Comment by Jerry R. Reynolds -
Not all bloggers report news. Many share information as lessons learned. Credibility means something completely different depending upon what type of blogger one is.
Comment by DazzlinDonna -
It does seem like the only readers on most blogs are the person who owns the blog or spam software. However, some larger blogs do have significant viewers and usually these readers will tear the blogger a new one if he/she makes something up. In traditional news the general public doesn\’t have the option to catch mistakes and the only thing watching traditional news for mistakes is competing news channels.
Comment by LG Washing Machines -
The sad fact is, News groups are only selling people what they want to hear. Its not even about agenda anymore, its about money. No news source is credible. You ever here the saying, \”reportedly…has agreed to a…\”? All to push ratings for the next broadcast and force people to choose a side. Is there such a thing as information extortion? Where by news groups force people to defend themselves or their entity based on a \”claim\” or \”mis-quote\”? Mark here is an idea for a T.V. Show, \”HD Undercover – Exposing News\”.
I still would like your help/partnership with US Home Watchers. This is the next big project you are seeking my friend!
Jerry R. Reynolds
US Home Watchers
Comment by Jerry R. Reynolds -
Regarding your ass violation a few weeks back, you should have stayed awake to break into \”Moon River\”, aka Chevy Chase in Fletch. Greatness…
Comment by Jeff -
I always advocate if you\’re not going to answer a reporter\’s question, tell the reporter why in an answer that the \”real audience\” will identify with. I saw one story on this matter in which Mr. Cuban was quoted as saying (and I am admittedly paraphrasing here) \”Only the losing side battles a legal case in the media.\” I thought that was an excellent response.
The issues in this matter seem very clear cut and the shocking thing to me is that the media, at least the media I saw, heard and read, just didn\’t seem to \”get it.\” The issue is that a former Mavericks coach apparently agreed to a contract containing a non-compete clause and then openly violated that clause. Case closed. The former coach\’s attorney seemed to want to raise the issue of why non-compete clauses are included in contracts which is completely irrelevant to the issue of whether the clause exists and was signed.
There was this thought that kept ruunning around in my head during a lot of this and that was the thought that the \”typical talk radio idiots\” who were criticizing Mr. Cuban probably also had contracts that would not allow them to go to another radio station in this market within a specified period of time after leaving their current employ.
Comment by Pete Oppel -
I was dissapointed by the Dallas Morning News (yet again) handling of the Cuban-Nelson story. Or, this latest Cuban-Nelson story since it was so clearly biased and lacking information.
I don\’t always agree with Mark\’s actions, but there is always some merit and logic. Yet, everyone ran with this story and just assumed that a) it was true and b) that Mark is really stupid.
I find both of those assumptions pretty funny.
I also enjoyed Kevin Sherrington\’s article today where he took a nearly month old article by Bill Simmons on ESPN.com and presented it as his own by simply adding some local references.
And he\’s actually not the worst sports writer at that paper.
Comment by Brad -
I would have thought the point of having your own blog was to present your side of the story. I think you\’re absolutely correct that No Comment doesn\’t work anymore, at least if you want to have the story defined on your terms instead of the media\’s.
Comment by Ben Fulton -
This blog stuff is AMAZING ! a regular dude like me can actually communcate directly with a billionare sports team owner.
Mark, did you see my ideas to make the UFL work ? what do you think ? please hire me to help you make this thing a success.
I\’ll work for peanuts just to be part of something new and exciting. FOOTBALL is KING ! and plenty of room for another league. just like when Wendy\’s and MCI entered the game ….
Comment by Jake Holder -
I know you didn\’t write this about politics, but that is where the media really blew it. Look at Iraq. Look at the NY Times. They were once a respected newspaper. Look how many reporters they have that either make stuff up, or basically print anything a government flunkie says, with out checking out its veracity. Newspapers aren\’t about the news anymore. They are about an agenda. What that agenda is, I don\’t know.
Comment by Ghost of Tom Joad -
I can see you getting upset at the way a story was written, but not that it *was* written. If Nellie (and we all know it was Nellie) speaks to the media about something concerning you, and you refuse to comment, that\’s not their problem. Of course, they should present the story as his opinion only, not fact until it\’s proven one way or the other. It\’s a story because Nellie is a public figure, just like you are. If you don\’t like his side of the story getting ink, provide your side. Or at least say why you don\’t want to say anything.
Comment by GM -
Rest assured this is a world wide pandemic, from bustling cities to small islands… news reports claim to \”have\” a story. The disappointing thing is that most readers BELIEVE it.
Comment by Stephen -
Great post Mark! You are right that many bloggers have fewer then 25 readers. Many bloggers write because they have a passion about something, and that is what makes many blogs so enjoyable to read. Many blogs develop a regular almost cult-like following and creates a social network in the cyberworld. The blog I have written on for the past year is a small blog with 2 writers and about 150 regular followers. We know each other in our cyberworld and can jabber about topics we feel are meaningful. Is it credible? Am I credible? As for credibility of blogs, buyer beware. A blog is only as credible as the person writing it. And to a great extent only as credible as the last post that was written.
To me the best part of blogs (and electronic newspaper editions) is that I can now easily read a wide range of articles from a wide range of sources and make up my own mind!
Comment by HockeyNutz -
Anyone who writes a blog to gain credibility is as dumb as the guy who takes johnson-increasing pills to get women.
The only blog worth reading is the one where the author deliberately sets out to destroy their own credibility. Keeping all the four-letter words and occasional grammar mistake shows the world that you\’re a human being and not a shill in a corporate production machine.
I read good blogs for the sizzle and the smell. Let the dunsky experts argue over the taste.
Comment by Joshua Minton -
I blog to vent or amuse my friends. I enjoy reading blogs to get other peoples insight and opinions. But that is what a blog should be, opinion.
While it can be amusing, it is sad how irresponsible the media is. It\’s too bad you can\’t read news these days without having to do your own research to verify how factual it is.
I hope your recovery is going well!
Comment by Theresa -
I read your blog for the reasons that matter. I respect your opinion, because it typically comes across with a rationale.My belief systems are usually reinforced. That which matters most, however, is, you express your feelings with candor and passion, and balance them with respect for the issues.
The acid test for the real journalists is knowing when not to write anything at all, because it\’s been said before. Most bloggers just like seeing their own ink.
Comment by Randy Geider -
I guess the question is, in a world like this one, how does one quantify credibility?
Comment by Phil -
Thanks for your two cents, Mark. Great post.
Comment by Dewey -
Comments are closed.