Online Corrections

One of the goals of journalists should entail acurate reporting. When an error is found, a system for immediate correction should be in place. Many readers don't hesitate to contact a media outlet about a mistake, but there are many readers who believe it's a waste of time. Also, because online information is immediately spread, corrections often don't get the same attention as the original posting. These are, unfortunately, some of the challenges.

Nicole's blog topic leads to an article I came across as I was researching the case study. (The title is the link and I apologize in advance for the length, though Jeanne did say we need to read a lot!)

In the Online Journalism Review, the question asked whether corrections should be made as an addendum to the original article or whether the article itself should be corrected, thereby erasing the mistake.

A case can be made for each point of view, however I think in most situations, readers may not see the corrected material. Or, as one librarian (Michael Jesse) says, to keep reprinting an error, even when it is corrected, does not seem to be right.

Because we are dealing with eletronic databases, I think that corrections should be made and labeled clearly. Any thoughts?


href="<$BlogItemURL$>"><$BlogItemTitle$>