From the H&H video “USA Today In Hot Water…and is the Depp/Heard “Juror” Real? (H&H | 6-17-22)” | https://youtu.be/WcjUD8fQOrc

JUST THE HEADLINE:
“USA Today to Remove 23 Articles After Investigation Into Fabricated Sources”
The New York Times – June 16, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/16/business/media/usa-today-fabricated-sources.html

***
H&H Summary

USA Today has pulled almost two dozen articles after discovering one of its reporters was apparently fabricating sources.

Did the paper shatter an entirely different “Glass” ceiling?

Let’s discuss.

***
The “Just the Headlines” format strips out each of the meaty critical reading and reasoning sections (the “headlines”) from our traditional Hang-Outs and Headlines live stream format for a streamlined, analytical, hang-out free experience.

***
WANT TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL?

UTREON – https://utreon.com/c/hoeglaw/
PATREON – https://www.patreon.com/VirtualLegality
STORE – https://teespring.com/stores/hoeg-law-store

YOUTUBE MEMBERSHIP
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCi5RTzzeCFurWTPLm8usDkQ/join

BITCAST (Sundays 11AM Eastern) – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgHBXONMT06nX_8RZ5r32UA

***
For other shows on this channel:

“Virtual Legality” is a continuing series discussing the law, video games, software, and everything digital, hosted by Richard Hoeg, of the Hoeg Law Business Law Firm (Hoeg Law).

CHECK OUT THE REST OF VIRTUAL LEGALITY HERE:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1zDCgJzZUy9YAU61GoW-00K0TJOGnPCo

***
ALL DISCUSSION IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE. INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED IN THE LEGAL TOPICS DISCUSSED IN THIS VIDEO SHOULD CONSULT WITH THEIR OWN COUNSEL.

***
Twitter: @hoeglaw
Web: hoeglaw.com

***
DESIGN WORK
Joe Ellis (Logo Design)
Chris Leroux (Motion Graphics)
For more information contact Chris at @Chrisleroux on Twitter

source

13 Responses

  1. I'm 61 years young and I trust most of the YouTube channels I watch more than most MSM. I wouldn't even spend a dime on a newspaper now.

    This fabrication situation at these "news" outlets is really irritating considering their condescension towards social media as a resource for reliable information.

    It seems like sites such as YouTube, and the like, are constantly under scrutiny by their numerous viewers, and get nailed quickly when their content is incorrect.

    I'm hoping for a course correction soon in the way MSM is heading. (Note: I know the word "media" is plural, but it just sounds pedantic to say "the media are…" I feel the same way when people say "the data are…")

    I just recently found your channel and I'm enjoying it very much. It's not only enjoyable and informative, but also intelligent.

    I breed aquarium fish and I listen as I'm doing hours of daily tank maintenance. YouTube keeps me mentally occupied so my water changing tasks seem less annoying 😊.

    Thank you!

  2. So this reporter just "mailed it in", USA Today didn't check on her reporting before they ran the articles. 20 plus of them ffs… Happy to see they retracted and she is gone, but all the people that read those articles believed what she said and many don't know about the correction. At this point I don't believe anything mainstream media says. Better to get info from sources like this. Sources I trusted are all propaganda or little bits of truth overdramatized to get clicks. They got us where they want us now. Sad but true. Hopefully a better tomorrow. 🙏

  3. I think part of the problem stems from pressure put on the journalists to produce eye-catching articles to increase subscriptions, and to produce them faster than the next guy. Only in part though, because the journalist still has to take responsibility for making the decision to actually fabricate. Being under pressure isn't an excuse for throwing away integrity whether it's to pay the bills or not.

  4. hmm I think Simpsons prediction maybe?

    Homer: I'll just make up some news!
    Lisa: Ugh, at least take off your Pulitzer Prize when you say that!

    Not sure why this video has next to no traction but strange to see.

    News is what people are talking about, if what people are taking about is guided by specialists in the areas of concern (saw law) its more difficult to see the journalistic "value add" that has historically been the case. The ecosystem for news currently isn't a healthy one. What we see and want as quality journalism contrasts who what a newspaper thinks will make it the most money. Till they are the same we will be in a quality deficit of sorts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.