Speed vs. Accuracy: Too Much Pressure

Tess Stevens
TS075411@ohio.edu

Being a writer/journalist/musician/actor is something that not alot of people can do. I, sadly am attempting that feat and every day I realize how many shortcuts I have to take to succeed.  The only person that comes to mind that has excelled in a bunch of different trades is maybe...George Plimpton? Most won't get that reference, but he was marketed as the man who could "do it all." A modern day example could be my personal hero, Justin Timberlake or someone of the like, who takes on many different interests in the hopes of becoming the best out there.

In journalism there is so much pressure today to do it all. You have to know how to design, edit, do voiceover, shoot a camera, write for the teleprompter, create content and conduct interviews. Its this "jack of all trades" mentality that is driving people to cut corners. In the article, Confronting the Culture by Lori Robertson she addresses the mentality of plaigarism in modern journalism, claiming that newsrooms, "praise the people who get what nobody else gets," This ultimately leads to unethical practicies, inaccuracy and sometimes the destruction of lives. These so called "cost cutting measures" in the form of journalistic ineptitude have been seen more and more in the digital age. Just run down a twitter feed.

Some of the biggest blunders in news of the past year have been due to the idea that speed is more important than accuracy. Mentalities of, "if we get it out first we will generate interest in our network/newspaper/magazine and will ultimately sell more copies/get more viewers than our competetors" are everywhere and due to the accessability of the internet its easier to screw up. Just check out this post courtesy of pointer.com on the biggest blunders and corrections of 2013.

One of the most shocking inaccuracies I've seen, as mentioned in the afformentioned article, was the misidentification of two Boston Marathon bombing suspects that ran in the New York Post. The story was unchecked by any form of law enforcement and appeared to criminalize two unsespecting men who happened to be photographed with their backpacks on at the time of the bombing. With information circulating that the bombers were of similar stature and were also wearing backpacks, the Post ran with it.





How is this possible? Why did this happen? There's no way to know for sure why the Post would run with a completely bogus story with one out of context picture. My opinion? Too much pressure.
Too much pressure from networks, from people running the paper, from the masses wanting answers. Not enough time coupled with the pressure surrounding our instant culture led to a grave inaccuracy that could have ended lives.

Not only does this pressure to connect and spit out content lead to bogus information, but it also leads to bullshit writing, sloppy editing and the notion that the media doesn't care about ethics. That might be the biggest problem of all.