What makes the mainstream media better than some random Internet site or random blog?
Every pontificating journalist tells us it is the editorial processâ€”a process where the writer is held accountable via skilled editors.
What a crock.
Thanks to Roll Bama Roll we know the Sporting News â€œeditorsâ€ are less responsible than bloggers who work for the company. You can read about the story on RBR, but the summary is simple, an â€œeditorâ€ for the Sporting Blog from the Sporting News posted a photograph of an Alabama fan showing off his tattoo. The problem? The photograph was attached to a story regarding a criminal action. Then as to clarify this tatoo-bearing fan wasnâ€™t the criminal, the â€œeditorâ€ attached this helpful caption: Not the man accused, but still an idiot.
While the man may or may not be an idiot, when did it become journalistic practice to run a photograph in such a derogatory manner? Why link an innocent person with a criminal activity? Moreover, this isn’t a public figure being lampooned. It is just a fan attending a sporting event.
We donâ€™t expect that type of behavior from a reputable media outlet.
We are told over and over and over and over that what makes mainstream media better than the new media are the old standards of professionalism. These standards are enforced with skilled editors, who apply fundamental journalistic principles to editorial content.
We are assured that as mainstream outlets move online, they will bring their standards with them, and improve the quality of online journalism.
Someone forgot to tell this Sporting News â€œeditor.â€
Todd at RBR calls the Sporting News out for â€œa cheap, unwarranted shot (at an innocent bystander)…Boo on the Sporting News.â€
Iâ€™ll go further. It is a despicable action which showcases the hypocrisy of the mainstream media.