[shadowgovt]

As a useful rule of thumb, the New York Times prints retractions.

If your news source never prints retractions, it's not to be trusted.

[adolph]

NYT prints some retractions and corrections and also changes stories they have published without any notice.

Times editors have thus far rejected appeals to flag readers when stories are reworked, unless it’s a correction. They argue that making such edits are a routine part of digital publishing — you edit a piece, publish it, then report more or add more context, then republish it again, on through the news cycle.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/public-editor/liz-spayd-n...

[shadowgovt]

Version control on digital news stories would be nice to have, but I can't disagree with their thinking on the topic. Putting the most up-to-date version forward is standard digital publishing protocol.

[adolph]

Clearly "standard digital publishing protocol" isn't something that can be trusted.

[ameminator]

As a rule of thumb, no reporting is to be trusted. The only way out is to read widely and read well and come up with your own opinions.

[specialist]

Yes and:

Sign your name, cite your sources, share your data. aka authenticity.

Extra credit for verification, fact checking, vetting sources. aka journalism.

And as you say, earn merit badge for intellectual honesty. Including retractions, updates, followups, listing assumptions, etc.

[rbanffy]

> As a useful rule of thumb, the New York Times prints retractions.

And, yet, a lot of the US public opinion is shaped by Fox News...

[giantg2]

Do other tv/cable news networks print retractions? I can't remember any, but maybe they have a specific webpage you have to go to in order to see it? I doubt any of the non-news programs on those networks do, and those comprise the majority of the programming. So maybe it's just hard to find for the little bit of actual news.

[rbanffy]

> I doubt any of the non-news programs on those networks do

My impression is they only have opinion programs and no news reporting whatsoever.

[giantg2]

I'm not sure since I get most of my news online. I thought they had like 2 hours per day that were non-opinion news.

[rbanffy]

The HN crowd is not the typical Fox News audience.

[knownjorbist]

In this very thread they are regurgitating talking points from fox punditry.

[giantg2]

I don't just mean Fox. MSNBC, etc seems to mostly be talk shows too.

[knownjorbist]

This is exactly correct.

[fortuna86]

Stories online, when altered, are labeled as such with corrections.

Several outlets have been caught scrubbing past headlines that were proven false, but that's more an indictment on them.

[giantg2]

"Stories online, when altered, are labeled as such with corrections."

I get that. But how do the TV news programs do it? I don't remember them starting with, or including at all, a corrections segment.

[fortuna86]

Rarely. Most news isn't "breaking" on TV, even if they do they refer to the online story. So that's where stories are corrected, because that's the official record.

[giantg2]

Do they actually refer people to the online story, or do you just mean they are using that story to regurgitate to the viewers? I highly doubt most of the viewers are recieving the corrections if they're only given online.

Yeah, when there is breaking news it seems there's a ton of speculation and bad information given.