Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rc_bhg 2991 days ago
"Must not intentionally report false information as truth."

Thus, lawsuites would be allowed if your org was found to be intentionally lying. But unless someone can prove you did it intentionally, they have no case.

Obviously you can lie all you want if you take the word "News" out of your name.
2 comments
chiefalchemist 2991 days ago
There are rules, regs & best practices (and licenses) for a slew of trades that are not the fourth leg (i.e., Fourth Estate) of a proper democracy. Electricians, plumbers, hair stylists and such come to mind. And while it does not have to be gov based, why not journalism? Can't these (pardon me) meat-heads police themselves?

Aside from news, journalism is another word that needs a proper and widely held definition. A blogger on the internet is not journalism. Lester Holt is not a journalist. Oprah is not a journalist. (Editorial: Shame on you 60 Minutes.)

I agree. It might not stop the lies, but it would draw a much needed line in the sand. Personally, I'm exhausted from trying to rationalize with people who get their information and thoughts from sources they presume are legit news and well-practiced journalism.

link
nugi 2991 days ago
I struggle to name a single source that is not Signifigantly biased. But worse than ever, fewer orgs seem to speak with a single editorial voice. One NYT article will be well sourced and informative, and the next will be raving identity-politics hate-fuel without a single citation or fact. Even distinguishing by outfit is outdated. Perhaps I just need to follow more writers, but I worry of creating my own bubble. Its a tall order.
link
794CD01 2990 days ago
If you don't create your own bubble, it means you're in one someone else created for you.
link
tangent128 2991 days ago
Willful ignorance offers a pretty big loophole to that definition.

If you don't fact check information, nobody can say you know it's false.

link
chiefalchemist 2991 days ago
Yes. Perfect actually. Then if you don't fact check it can't be presented as news.

I think also we could apply the (legal) concept of "reasonable and customary." If say the rest of the (media) industry reported X, Y and Z and you only did Y then that's not reasonable and customary.

No doubt there's grey area. But as it is, we're living in a "brown area" if you know what I mean ;)

link