Gary, I agree that there is no excuse for not delivering on promises.
Whenever I promise to verify quotes, I always do so, even though this
can be tricky if there is a time lapse between the interview and the
final edit. I don't know of any media organizations that prohibit, or
even discourage, this practice. But if all of my sources demanded to
check final quotes, it would be quite an inconvenience. Most
scientists trust me to get their quotes right, perhaps because I
record many of my interviews (with permission, of course).
I also agree that "the media" are by no means uniformly trustworthy,
independent, accurate and fair. That's why I think it makes sense to
form your own judgments about which journalists can be trusted (based
on their track record as well as your own personal experiences with
them), and to be proactive about seeking out relationships with those
people.
We need to distinguish here between verifying quotes and sending a
copy of an entire article, which you have lumped together as "fact
checking." Many publications make a practice of reading back quotes
to sources, and that is something that sources can request or demand
if it is not offered.
Sending the draft of an entire article, however, is another matter.
Most publications do not make a habit of it, and many forbid it. Some
sections of the article may be about another scientist's work,
perhaps even someone who disagrees with you; should you have the
right to check those portions of the article too? I think you can see
why this could be problematic.
As I said earlier, there is no hard-and-fast rule about sharing
stories. Some of us are willing to read back portions of an article—
either for our own fact-checking, or to reassure you that we got it
right. But that is not always practical or necessary, and at many
publications it is just not allowed.
Best,
Dawn Stover
On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:19 PM, Gary Grossman wrote:
In addition, in every case I
asked to be able to verify my quotes and made it clear that this
was just
"fact checking" and in *every* case I was assured that I would get the
article for fact checking and guess how many times it has happend - 0,
Whether this is journalistic practice or not, it is untruthful.
