I’ve been hearing a lot of major news organizations lately using video that they “can’t independently verify,” as in the following: “NBC News has not been able to independently verify the video we’re about to show you.” What? So, let me get this straight. You’re going to show me something that you’re not sure is true?
From the Donald Sterling tape to the recent surveillance video which appears to show Beyonce’s younger sister attacking her husband Jay Z, if it “looks real,” that seems to be good enough for news managers. Maybe it’s a function of so-called “reality” (which is anything but) TV. Maybe it’s the rush to “out TMZ” TMZ.
Maybe it’s just laziness or an abdication of one of the major principles upon which credible journalism is based: independence—a central tenet of the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics.
I didn’t know this until recently, but apparently TMZ is an acronym for “ten mile zone,” as in anything outside a ten mile radius of Hollywood isn’t “news.” That’s fine for TMZ. But, if you’re a major news organization, shouldn’t you employ a slightly wider lens and, by the way, shouldn’t you turn that lens inward when it comes to your own reporting?
How about beginning with verifying the source of the video before you run it? After all, whether it’s for monetary gain or public relations advantage, most moving images that aren’t the result of your own independent reporting most often come with an agenda.
You don’t get a pass by saying “we haven’t been able to independently verify it.” That doesn’t sound like due diligence to me. I don’t think it does to your audience, either.
The Sterling story is an important one, the Beyonce story not so much. Creating equivalency between the two, based solely upon the existence of salacious “tape,” diminishes the significance of either. Even worse, running that video, without verification of the circumstances under which it was recorded—reduces your own credibility as a news source.
Look, Sterling is not a poster child for tolerance. But how do we, as legitimate news organizations, report his story accurately if we’re not even sure of our source’s authenticity? Hearing people in their own words—especially when their words are outrageous–is compelling television. But it’s worth stopping to remember that compelling television isn’t always great journalism.