I hear on a local bulletin from Cadena SER on Tuesday, August 18, that a company is being accused of “dumping contaminated water” into a pond. Well, anyone can make a mistake. But in the next bulletin, the conjugation error grates again. From this, it is deduced that no one quickly corrected the person who had made that professional mistake, so they would not repeat it.
Read more A summer of nostalgia with ‘Dragon Ball’: Goku, long live the homeland!
Almost every morning, season after season, the person giving the weather report on that station repeats “the rest of the regions,” instead of “the rest of the regions.” (When reproducing those expressions now in Word, the spellchecker warns me that it should be “verter,” and underlines “regions” to indicate the missing article).
The news media give the impression all the time that their quality controls have almost disappeared; or, put more bluntly, that no one corrects anyone, not even out of Christian charity (except the Word spellchecker).
Day after day, we read and hear many journalists using the conditional of rumor, banned by most style guides, without their bosses or colleagues feeling concerned about this trick that serves to transmit unverified or false news.
The newspaper LaRazón.es reported on August 20 at 13:01: “Instead of buying luxury cars or making extravagant investments, Barça star Pablo Gavi would have quietly allocated 1.3 million euros to building homes for homeless people in his hometown. The young footballer would have invested that amount in creating a modern complex with 150 apartments and 300 beds intended to help the most vulnerable people. (…) ‘I have always believed that I have the responsibility to act when I have the opportunity to make a difference,’ Gavi would have shared.” The information was reproduced in many media outlets that did not distrust those three “would have,” nor the absence of sources, and assumed everything as true without any verification: LaVanguardia.com, August 21: “Gavi allocates 1.3 million to building homes for homeless people in Los Palacios.” ElMundo.es, August 21: “Gavi donates 1.3 million to build homes for homeless people in his town.” Sport.es, August 22: “Gavi invests 1.3 million in building 150 homes for homeless people in his childhood town.” And many more. (The same happened on social networks, which in this case were no worse a source than some of the press considered serious).
Read more The Vox slogan clashes with reality: the halal menu is not banned in Valencian schools
One newspaper did its job, the Cádiz-based LaVozdelSur.es. It spoke with representatives of the footballer, with the Urban Planning Delegation, with municipal authorities: neither the donation nor the housing project existed…, nor did the statements. And it decided to report it. (Interestingly, a similar hoax had spread in 2012 about a donation of 300,000 euros by Iniesta, after winning the Eurocup).
A large number of media did not cite the source (La Razón) until the news was denied. Almost none mentioned La Voz del Sur in subsequent corrections. And others deleted the information afterward, without further explanation, in a tremendous lack of respect for their readers.
Journalism should take very seriously that it is essential to increase quality controls, and also to recover the old network of sincere and kind corrections among colleagues. The way to compete in the long term with social networks and the irresponsible agility of countless frivolous media is not to compete with their speed, but to maintain consistency.
Read more Immigration will be the key issue to win the next elections
