It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jumping the Gun

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 06:34 PM
link   
I have noticed a spat of news stories jumping the gun lately. This is the latest one.

I know there is a great interest in getting the news out quickly, as well as healthy competition between the reporters for "scoops" and points.

Too many times it has resulted in sort of an "oops sorry, we jumped the gun on that one" kind of thing.

There is no way ATSNN or ATS will have its newsgathering and topic debates/analysis taken seriously in this fashion.

Can we find a way of encouraging some healthy investigative competition rather than a race?

Any ideas on how to set something like that up?

If we have "official" reporters then perhaps other members like myself should not be permitted to submit directly onto the main news board. That way the reporters can take the time to investigate a developing story rather that try to beat a member to make it to the front page.

Story submissions from members could still be permitted but at the very least they should be made in a private thread accessible to reporters only (comes with their status) and as Always ATS members have the option of posting in the forums.

Any other ideas?




posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Muaddib posted this report at 5:13 p.m. (my time)...17 minutes later it was updated with my post. At ATSNN the entire ATSNN thread is part of the development of the story, as well as the discussion that is generated from the article.

Am I assuming that you are insinuating that breaking/developing news stories should not be covered until they have completely come to a state of equilibrium?

I think not.

If reporting a story as it develops will keep ATSNN from being taken seriously, so be it. I would much rather see a report on what is currently known and watch the development of the story close to real-time, than wait for details of a completed story from a biased mainstream media with an agenda.

[edit on 7-28-2004 by Valhall]



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
... At ATSNN the entire ATSNN thread is part of the development of the story, as well as the discussion that is generated from the article.


I did not realise that.




Am I assuming that you are insinuating that breaking/developing news stories should not be covered until they have completely come to a state of equilibrium?


Of course not.
Just enough time to make sure it is worthy of "Breaking News" and a headline like "Bomb Explosion on New York Subway".


... from a biased mainstream media with an agenda.


From what I can gather ATSNN reports stories and links from other media organisations all of which are biased in their own way.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Gools,

Now I know what you are saying but it doesn't follow what the spirit of ATS is all about, participation and the quest for the truth.

Most of the people reporting are trying to post newsworthy articles and because of these contributions, members get the opportunity to become reporters. Without participation from the members where would we get our new "scoopers"? (Where would I be now. )

Breaking news is sometimes sketchy at best and ATSNN will update the story in "real time" to give you what we have the minute we find it. Being on top of stories gives you a place where you can see all stories in one page instead of maybe catching them on some other source. Do all Breaking stories end up what the original was? Not always, but there are many times the info posted
rings true after scrutiny.

So if you look at breaking stories as a living entity which changes over time and grows into the truth would it be easier to understand?

Just trying to find a happy medium here.

Can we get back to newshounding?



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Can we get back to newshounding?


Yes.


Point well taken JacKatMtn.

Like I said in my reply to Valhall I did not realise what the ATSNN "mission" or "spirit" was all about.

No harm no foul I hope. Ever wish you could take back a post?

Oh well it will serve as a lesson I guess.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools


From what I can gather ATSNN reports stories and links from other media organisations all of which are biased in their own way.


This is absolutely correct. Though we have had some exclusives that are completely original ATS member creations, the majority is based off other media sources.

This brings up the importance of the "breaking news" situation, and reporting it as it occurs (as close as possible). It is during the breaking/developing news situations that the media is as close to "raw" in details as you can find them. These are rare moments of honest details in amongst the confusing and later retracted comments that can some times occur. And if you watch a story, you can find that details that are never retracted are later ommitted in the "refined" story.

[edit on 7-28-2004 by Valhall]



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join