In another recent Sealover article, I noticed that there seemed to be a preference for selecting inaccurate, misleading, controversial and/or inflammatory sound bites from interviews rather than do simple fact checking, or even provide the facts to enable the reader to understand the full picture. I'm not a journalist but, even with limited space allocation and deadline pressures, doesn't that fall short of the professional standards of journalism, not to mention simple honesty? I wonder whether this is a possible problem with Sealover's training or whether he is being undercut by Gazette editors. If the latter, it's got to be frustrating and embarrassing for him. If it's being done consciously and with editorial support, it's a shame.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation