Public corrections databases
Interesting idea from Salon's Scott Rosenberg, who notes that journalists might adopt the open-source movement's approach to tracking bugs to tracking corrections in a public database.
"Let people file 'bug reports' if they believe your publication has published something in need of correcting. The publication can respond however it seems appropriate: If the complaint is frivolous, you point that out; if it's a minor error of spelling or detail, you fix it; if it's a major error, you deal with it however you traditionally deal with major errors -- but you've left a trail that shows what happened. However you respond, you've opened a channel of communication, so that people who feel you've goofed don't just go off to their corners (or their blogs!) feeling that you're unresponsive and irresponsible.
I know this idea will horrify a lot of editors and reporters, but I think an adventurous newsroom could benefit from the transparency and the accountability. Maybe someone's already doing this out there -- if so, it would be great to see what we can learn."
Correction: An earlier version of this post mistakenly said Rosenberg worked for Slate.
Jul 13, 2005 | E-MAIL | SAVE | PRINT | PERMALINK | DISCUSS(1)
Discussion
1 comments about 'Public corrections databases'We can start right here. Scott Rosenberg writes for Salon, not that other 5-letter publication that starts with S.
There's some good comments in the responses. Of course, this is what Constructive Media theory is all about.
Overall, it's a good idea-- it solves a problem that blogs alone are not effectively solving.
Posted by Jon Garfunkel at July 13, 2005 5:37 PM
Post a comment
Site Map
