First of all, thanks for your newsletter and all the info, promise to upgrade to paid. Related to abundance, I noticed a lot of grants for fact-checking and connex activities. Without disregarding the work of fact-checkers not a bit, we know the amount of mis, dis and the rest of `info` is huge and their efforts are no match for this fight, unfortunately.
Why not teach the public fishing instead of giving them fish? Why don't I have on my website a stamp that says `check my news'? Or any other news. We have the tools AI's, software etc, why not create a disinfo lab or whatever for the public to acces and check my/others' work in a simple and comprehensible format. I am a local journalist, too small for such an endeavour, but it's perfectly doable with the help of European Comission or others, I don't know, the IMS runned by Claire Cook, who knows.
A lot of journalists will surely agree to promote and call the public to use this tool. Of course, it will be a lot of turmoil, subjective biases and so on, but we get them involved and this is the first step. Because it's about trust, in the end. Even if a lot of readers hate me and my newspaper for publishing what they don't like, when it's about floods, a snowstorm, the voting process, explaining local authorities decisions etc, they come to our website. They like Tiktok and the rest more, but they trust me, not Tiktok, for their important decisions.
This was a long and painful process, we've been there for 30 years, but it could be shortened with this disinfo tool for the public, I believe. Cause journalism, no matter how categorized, has two types: good journalism and bad journalism. As the bad one prevails nowadays, any action to support the good one, to separate the sand from the ash, any mark, sign or activity that shows I am a reliable media vehicle is a step forward. And than we can talk money with more confidence.
First of all, thanks for your newsletter and all the info, promise to upgrade to paid. Related to abundance, I noticed a lot of grants for fact-checking and connex activities. Without disregarding the work of fact-checkers not a bit, we know the amount of mis, dis and the rest of `info` is huge and their efforts are no match for this fight, unfortunately.
Why not teach the public fishing instead of giving them fish? Why don't I have on my website a stamp that says `check my news'? Or any other news. We have the tools AI's, software etc, why not create a disinfo lab or whatever for the public to acces and check my/others' work in a simple and comprehensible format. I am a local journalist, too small for such an endeavour, but it's perfectly doable with the help of European Comission or others, I don't know, the IMS runned by Claire Cook, who knows.
A lot of journalists will surely agree to promote and call the public to use this tool. Of course, it will be a lot of turmoil, subjective biases and so on, but we get them involved and this is the first step. Because it's about trust, in the end. Even if a lot of readers hate me and my newspaper for publishing what they don't like, when it's about floods, a snowstorm, the voting process, explaining local authorities decisions etc, they come to our website. They like Tiktok and the rest more, but they trust me, not Tiktok, for their important decisions.
This was a long and painful process, we've been there for 30 years, but it could be shortened with this disinfo tool for the public, I believe. Cause journalism, no matter how categorized, has two types: good journalism and bad journalism. As the bad one prevails nowadays, any action to support the good one, to separate the sand from the ash, any mark, sign or activity that shows I am a reliable media vehicle is a step forward. And than we can talk money with more confidence.
Catalin Moraru
editor in chief Monitorul de Botosani