The Dogood Letters: A little fact checking goes a long way | CF

9 Comments

• mpetty says:

  November 23, 2009 at 9:29 am

  The cynic in me wonders how much of this article was unedited press release, and why the paper bothered with putting a byline with a reporter’s name on it if it was.
• Marenka says:

  November 23, 2009 at 1:39 pm

  The Dogood Letters’ author is extremely petty. For all the venom that he spews, this reads like an involuntarily terminated journalist with an ax to grind.
  I hope he has a good libel lawyer.
• Christopher Spencer says:

  November 23, 2009 at 2:00 pm

  I still think questioning Arvest’s claim about their app was valid. The bank has a very active blog and they tout everything they do there and in the media who will pick up their press releases.

  The knocks against the reporter were petty.

  I remember earlier this year when Arvest was going around to media to tout their effort to get a branch LEED certified. The effort was that they were seeking the LEED certification, not that they had it yet. Some media picked it up, others didn’t because they realized anyone can seek any certification. It’s whether or not you actually get it that makes such a thing news.
• Silence says:

  November 24, 2009 at 12:12 am

  Sorry to disappoint, but I’ve only met the reporter, never worked with her. The critiques are harsh because no one listens to polite.
• Christopher Spencer says:

  November 24, 2009 at 1:36 am

  I appreciate you commenting here, Silence. It’s always nice to communicate with other bloggers, anonymous or not.

  It’s an unfortunate thing that reporters at Northwest Arkansas Newspapers and the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette are banned from responding to comments in their stories and elsewhere. Personally, I think that’s antiquated newsroom sensibility that will eventually die out.

  Responding to our readers and accepting blame when we are incorrect is something I hope Ozarks Unbound can someday earn a reputation for in the future.

  Again, I thought the critique you made of Arvest’s claim was valid and worth exploring.

  Now, I don’t the situation about this particular story, but I’ll add something in reporters’ defense about press releases. There’s just never enough time in the day to fact-check absolutely everything an agency claims while pumping out stories on deadline.

  Even less so since the merger, I would imagine.

  Some press releases raise red flags while others do not. I’ll confess my own radar for fact-checking would have been low in this case.
• Morgan Dooley says:

  November 24, 2009 at 9:09 am

  I have to laugh at this one. Honestly. I replied on the original story with a comment that was not flattering. What a shocker that it was not approved for posting on the blog. There isn’t much I dislike more than someone taking pop shots at another without the courage to do so as themselves. I guess facing the consequences and being accountable is something that particular blogger feels should only be done by the press.
• mpetty says:

  November 24, 2009 at 10:11 am

  In the spirit of showing my identity…

  While the personal attacks on Ms Flowers were without-a-doubt inappropriate, calling the quality of her reporting into question is definitely fair.

  Excuses about there not being enough time to fact-check a story are poor at best. This mistake highlights the importance of being transparent about sources when news releases are published. Ms Flowers deserves a portion of the blame for trying to take credit for corporate promotions, and her editors deserve the rest for failing to do their duty as deliverers of the facts and quality news.

  This story never should have made it out of the budget meeting, and it would have been far more compelling if Arvest had been called out for lying about their iPhone app.
• Silence says:

  November 25, 2009 at 12:13 am

  Morgan, I appreciated your comment, and it was approved, but you did not comment on this entry. You actually commented on another one: http://thedogoodletters.blogspot.com/2009/11/quick-thoughts_22.html.
  I hope this clears up the confusion. I firmly believe you should never trust any institution that doesn’t allow anyone to see criticism of itself.
• Morgan Dooley says:

  November 25, 2009 at 4:19 pm

  My apologies, you are correct. I agree about who you should and should not trust. I also firmly believe you should never trust anyone who hides behind avatars and user names all while they take petty shots at people and dish out criticisms. It’s a practice worthy of contempt.

Trackbacks