Today while procrastinating I saw a link on the Atlanta Journal Constitutions’s Twitter feed about a bleach fight at a Walmart. The story itself is on a news blog, ripped off from another news outlet’s story, but that seems to be the norm these days. Whatever.
Anyway, I got through about a sentence of the story before the minute little part of my brain who still gives a shit about ethics in the media started going nuts almost immediately. Take a look:
That’s a photo of a goat.
Not only is that a photo of a goat, THAT’S A PHOTO OF A GOAT FROM THE “PEOPLE OF WALMART” BLOG from August 2009. It’s even watermarked.
And then there’s the caption:
This farm animal wisely walked past the aisle containing chemicals and furious shoppers.
Um…. no it didn’t.
So, not only does this photo have absolutely nothing to do with the story and add nothing to the story, it’s ripped off another blog and the yet the caption would lead less detail-oriented readers to believe that it was taken at the same time as the bleach fighting incident.
I’m pretty sure over in Athens somewhere ol’ Captain Ethics Conrad Fink’s eyebrows exploded.
This might be acceptable from some crappy news blog on the internet somewhere or in a Fark comments thread, but not from a reputable news publication such as the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
For shame, AJC.
Agreed. Besides the fact that it’s completely misleading, when did it become okay to just use a photo from another website? I’m pretty sure the person who submitted that picture to People of Walmart didn’t give permission to the AJC to reuse their picture. And if you’re going to break ethics rules, make it for something better than a stupid goat picture that doesn’t even illustrate the story anyway.
unfortunately once something is online, it’s fair game to use as long as you give credit according to the DMCA. And news orgs get an exemption. Lazy journalism is what I call it.
And you’re right about news operations just re-writing other places stories all the time. It’s really irritating. Everyone’s reporting is based on everyone elses reporting. I sent a pretty blunt email to the LA Times and a few other organizations a couple weeks ago after the Times reported Jared Loughner as the “Tuscan shooter.” A quick Google search and I found tons of people who had obviously ripped their info straight from there. Calling him the Tuscan shooter and everything.
And “This might be acceptable from some crappy news blog on the internet somewhere or in a Fark comments thread, but not from a reputable news publication such as the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.” AGREED.
What the hell? I’ve heard of lazy journalism, but this is outrageous.
The editor who picked this image needs to be slapped first, then fired.
Talk about multiple breaches in ethics.
Thanks for sharing this.