Why was the media so wrong?

[Bluefire4]

Because we were actually looking at other options.

[oldunclemark]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 10:59 PM, GoColts8818 said:

I think the plan was to release Pagano.  The situation changed based on the support of the players, not willing to pay the asking price for Payton, and the meeting with Pagano.  

But that makes the media wrong..because they said it would happen...not that it was a plan that would be changed

 

[oldunclemark]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 4:15 AM, NewColtsFan said:

 

There's a difference, a huge difference,  between reporting stories that are not true,  and those that are taken out of context or exaggerated.

 

Taken out of context and or exaggerated are more in the eye of the reader.

 

Printing stories that are not true are so rare as to almost not be noticed.     There's also a huge difference in someone who gets a story wrong and someone who prints something that isn't true.

 

Isn't true implies deliberate.     Getting it wrong implies an honest mistake.     Huge difference.

 

Getting stories wrong happen all the time.    The way you punish websites or newspapers that get stories wrong is by not buying or reading them if they mess-up too often.    Printing something deliberately false just isn't done at the highest levels of journalism.    It shouldn't happen on the medium or smallest levels.    But I can't speak for everyone in the profession.

 

Mixed articles about Pagano?     How were they mixed?     Most all of them said he was done,  that Irsay would likely fire him.     Mixed implies some said he'd be fired and some said he'd be retained.     Who said he'd stay?

 

The difference in stories typically comes down to different media outlets having different sources.   Some sources are better than others.   More in the loop.     Getting a story wrong does not mean the outlet lied.

 

I'm happy to continue discussing this.    As a journalist,  your credibility is ALL YOU HAVE.    If you're not credible,  you've got nothing.     It's the coin of the realm.

 

Its not lies..but being wrong should be highlighted...its as bad aslying

 

If a  coach or player (or politician) says something that is not right..he is ridiculed and doubted in the future.

..and yes, he is accused of lying

Why does that not happen to media 'insiders'

[oldunclemark]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 1:47 AM, NewColtsFan said:

 

I seriously doubt the media was wrong.

 

I think Irsay explored other options,  found that he wasn't getting the answers he wanted,  and decided he'd stick with Pagano.

 

In short,  he simply changed his mind.      

 

That doesn't mean the media was wrong......

 

No, NCF..I would respectfully disagree.  They were wrong. 100% wrong.   In Spanish 'El wrongo'

 

When you say that the coach will not be retained..and start speculatingon who will get the 'Indy job', and then there is no Indy job.....no, you are wrong..

Imagine a city politician saying that he will fire his police chief and then when he is elected mayor, saying he is retaining him explaining that.....well ......'I simply changed his mind'....and that doesn't make what I said before 'wrong' in any way?

 

 

[GoColts8818]

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

But that makes the media wrong..because they said it would happen...not that it was a plan that would be changed

 

And I never said they were right...

 

the media, especially sports writers get stuff wrong all the time this isn't exactly new.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

Its not lies..but being wrong should be highlighted...its as bad aslying

 

If a  coach or player (or politician) says something that is not right..he is ridiculed and doubted in the future.

..and yes, he is accused of lying

Why does that not happen to media 'insiders'

 

Because  getting a story wrong is NOT viewed the same as lying.    Not even close to the same.

 

Every journalist ever born has been wrong about a story.    You're just not going to be right 100 percent of the time.    

 

So, no one wants to publicly shame another journalist,  because it's just a matter of time before you're wrong, and then what?

 

Sometimes your source is wrong.   Not maliciously wrong,  just wrong.   They're an insider, but their "read" of some development is wrong and they inadvertently pass along bad info.     As a journalist,  your job then is to be less trusting of that source going forward.    And the next time that source gives you a tip,  then you're going to have to get more sources to back it up.     Getting multiple sources is a good thing,  but it's not always possible.

 

With the advent of twitter,  there's far greater pressure to be first with a story, then there is to be right with a story.   It shouldn't be that way,  but it is.      People want to know something NOW!!     They can't wait for multiple sources to confirm,  they want it NOW!!     Some journalists are more responsible and they won't go public without multiple sources.    But they risk not being first and being viewed as irrelevant.    

 

Sometimes there are competing priorities.....    and sometimes that pressure is from your own boss....   

 

"Get it RIGHT!" fights with "Get it FIRST!"

 

The job is not as easy as it might seem.    

[ColtRider]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Because  getting a story wrong is NOT viewed the same as lying.    Not even close to the same.

 

Every journalist ever born has been wrong about a story.    You're just not going to be right 100 percent of the time.    

 

So, no one wants to publicly shame another journalist,  because it's just a matter of time before you're wrong, and then what?

 

Sometimes your source is wrong.   Not maliciously wrong,  just wrong.   They're an insider, but their "read" of some development is wrong and they inadvertently pass along bad info.     As a journalist,  your job then is to be less trusting of that source going forward.    And the next time that source gives you a tip,  then you're going to have to get more sources to back it up.     Getting multiple sources is a good thing,  but it's not always possible.

 

With the advent of twitter,  there's far greater pressure to be first with a story, then there is to be right with a story.   It shouldn't be that way,  but it is.      People want to know something NOW!!     They can't wait for multiple sources to confirm,  they want it NOW!!     Some journalists are more responsible and they won't go public without multiple sources.    But they risk not being first and being viewed as irrelevant.    

 

Sometimes there are competing priorities.....    and sometimes that pressure is from your own boss....   

 

"Get it RIGHT!" fights with "Get it FIRST!"

 

The job is not as easy as it might seem.    

 

One of the "truest" posts I've ever read in this forum. It's just that way. Good or bad. And we all have to live with it until it changes one way or another.

[cbear]

Well, you know how I feel about the media, but this is just more proof.  If Kravitz really did some digging and really got 4-5 good sources from the Colts organization, then I give him credit.  But the majority of media don't do much of anything other than just throw up (pun intended) what's going around the internet, forums, blogs, etc.  I doubt many of them actually do any real research and digging other than maybe a quick call to someone that might be a fringe player to the story.