The German news weekly Der Spiegel is to publish a 23-page special report on how one of its award-winning reporters faked stories for years and dealt a blow to media credibility.
Claas Relotius, 33, resigned after admitting making up stories and inventing protagonists in more than a dozen articles in the magazine’s print and online editions.
Since the scandal was revealed by the magazine on Wednesday, other mainstream German outlets including Die Welt and Die Zeit, which once used Relotius as a freelancer, have also begun poring through articles that he wrote for them.
“Tell it like it is,” wrote Der Spiegel on its latest magazine cover page, in an allusion to the publication’s motto coined by its founder, Rudolf Augstein, that also hangs at the entrance of its headquarters in Hamburg.
In its editorial, the magazine said the scam, involving subjects including Syrian orphans and a Holocaust survivor, was the “worst thing that can happen to an editorial team”.
I have to admire this guy, who of late was making up stories about the migrant caravan, but has really hit on all the high-points of fake news in the past decade: migrants, wars, holocaust reporting, you name it. Der Spiegel says it's preparing a criminal complaint against its fabulist ex-reporter, who appears to have solicited donations for children he described in his fake reports "Anil" and "Ahmed" which he routed to his private bank account
I don't question the need for independent and accurate journalism, but if ever there was an example of how elite media manipulates stereotypes, prejudice, and suspicion to create fake news, this is it.
"I have longed for shipwrecks, for havoc and violent death.” - Havoc, T. Kristensen
At a lower level, but still entertaining, we have Alex Seitz-Wald of MSNBC shilling for the Clintons and calling it journalism as the DNC conspired with her campaign to throw shade on Bernie Sanders campaign.
But it’s nevertheless illuminating to examine the mechanics of how the failed Clinton campaign’s particular efforts unfolded throughout the 2016 cycle; these granular details shed light on the incestuous and corrupting nature of contemporary digital political journalism.
Foremost among the Clintons’ coveted journalist friends was Seitz-Wald, who has been doggedly covering all-things-Clinton for MSNBC since August 2014, well before the presidential campaign formally began. Thanks to the WikiLeaks publications, his communications with Clinton staff are now a matter of public record.
"I have longed for shipwrecks, for havoc and violent death.” - Havoc, T. Kristensen
OK, lemme explain why this shit happens more and more.
Back in 1970, I wrote for Rolling Stone. We were a small alternative voice. We reported news that wasn't reported in the mainstream media. We knew we would be attacked. But facts are facts. And if we had our facts right, we were golden. For that reason, we had an enormous fact checking department: 5 to 6 men and women who went over your copy, checked every fact and re-interviewed our subjects. (Subject: Did you say xxx? Sometimes, when the subject said they didn't say it, I had to produce an audio tape or a set of contemporaneous notes.) Fact checkers had power. We reporters knew our feet would be held to the fire. You just simply couldn't make up shit.
But now print mags are in financial trouble. (I can explain why in another post.) So they have to cut workers. Can they cut writers? No, of course not. How are they going to fill up and sell their mags?
A few years ago, I visited the offices of Rolling Stone in NYC. It was like a ghost office. The floor was nearly empty. The research/fact-checking department didn't exist. It was now the editor's job to fact check. Which is how RS got the Virginia Frat rape story so wrong.
So, this shit happens because magazines think that a good way to save money is to eliminate the fact checkers. Doesn't work. It leads to embarrassment, lawsuits, and failure.
But if you read about this, der Spiegel claims they do use fact checkers... but they specifically don't check quotes with interviewees. Or facts, apparently. It seems they only check "credibility".
Schlegel wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:51 am
But if you read about this, der Spiegel claims they do use fact checkers... but they specifically don't check quotes with interviewees. Or facts, apparently. It seems they only check "credibility".
