WEBVTT

NOTE recognizability 0.920

NOTE language en-us

00:00:00.020 --> 00:00:04.810
This weekend a major black guy for the washington post and it has to do with anonymous

00:00:04.810 --> 00:00:09.610
sources when I say that phrase remember that the reporters and their editors do know

00:00:09.610 --> 00:00:14.260
the sources are but the rest of us don't so a few days ago anonymous sources

00:00:14.260 --> 00:00:19.220
rightly accurately enabled the new york times to break the news about the fbi...

00:00:19.220 --> 00:00:24.140
rudy giuliani's apartment but anonymous sources also apparently led the washington post

00:00:24.140 --> 00:00:28.000
astray when the paper reported that rudy was given a warning by

00:00:28.000 --> 00:00:32.920
the fbi it was front-page news the legend warning was that he was the target of

00:00:32.920 --> 00:00:36.960
a russian dirty tricks campaign to take down joe biden and the story was it

00:00:36.960 --> 00:00:40.940
really was warned about it but then when along with it anyway pretty,

00:00:40.940 --> 00:00:46.520
pretty damning the washington post at the far-right wing tv channel one american news was also more

00:00:46.520 --> 00:00:50.400
it now the new york times nbc news both matched

00:00:50.400 --> 00:00:54.750
the story matched in newsrooms big means that you found your own source and you've

00:00:54.750 --> 00:00:57.240
confirm that someone else's scope?

00:00:57.240 --> 00:00:59.760
But, maybe they were all misled by the same

00:00:59.760 --> 00:01:04.570
set of sources because on saturday they all walked back they

00:01:04.570 --> 00:01:09.500
...should corrections and retracted those reports the new story is that fbi agents

00:01:09.500 --> 00:01:12.190
planned to warn rudy and lan

00:01:12.190 --> 00:01:18.390
they might be used as russian buffets but they didn't actually deliver the morning.

00:01:18.390 --> 00:01:20.510
Let me bring in cnn dollar darcy has been covering this

00:01:20.510 --> 00:01:24.820
...story...on cnn dot com about it however the president of one american news charles

00:01:24.820 --> 00:01:29.380
herring said hey I appreciate the attractions but how can major national papers

00:01:29.380 --> 00:01:33.870
confirm something with sources so report fake news

00:01:33.870 --> 00:01:38.300
what's the answer well...be clear brian these aren't fake sources like

00:01:38.300 --> 00:01:43.260
caring is saying in fact the...organization they know like you said exactly who this these

00:01:43.260 --> 00:01:48.320
anonymous sources are when a reporter gets...from an anonymous source they go to

00:01:48.320 --> 00:01:52.150
...editor they look at this person they vet...they say how does this person no the

00:01:52.150 --> 00:01:56.740
information that they're giving us are they a credible source do we have other sources

00:01:56.740 --> 00:02:01.240
you can confirm what they're saying...all those things check out that they might go forward and report

00:02:01.240 --> 00:02:05.710
the information like happen in this case that said the safeguards,

00:02:05.710 --> 00:02:08.370
you know, th there are human error the

00:02:08.370 --> 00:02:13.030
...only work so much so sometimes sources get something

00:02:13.030 --> 00:02:19.030
wrong and they were the news organizations report the...hear back from the source and they learn

00:02:19.030 --> 00:02:23.390
...information wasn't correct in this case that appears to be

00:02:23.390 --> 00:02:27.700
what has happened with all these news organizations the bottom line is the

00:02:27.700 --> 00:02:31.810
...safeguards in place unfortunately human error is still at play and

00:02:31.810 --> 00:02:36.920
news organization sometimes do get burned like this I always say that the big dividing line

00:02:36.920 --> 00:02:41.390
...these days is between outlets that try to get it right now let's don't give a

00:02:41.390 --> 00:02:46.260
damn then obviously out of the post do try as you're saying they have layers of oversight ethics

00:02:46.260 --> 00:02:51.130
guidelines and corrections processes and yet a bogus report of this magnitude allows

00:02:51.130 --> 00:02:55.950
...actors do lump them in with like my...blog dot com,

00:02:55.950 --> 00:03:00.660
you know,...ends up tori all of the media it's not even your dogs blog dot

00:03:00.660 --> 00:03:06.010
com it's since I was like...york post...posted they had a big front-page error this week an

00:03:06.010 --> 00:03:10.980
online they didn't even issue a correction they only put an editor's note and walk back the entire story

00:03:10.980 --> 00:03:15.750
there online today making a big deal on their front page about these washington pose a new york times

00:03:15.750 --> 00:03:20.200
nbc news corrections the bottom line is that these organizations they were

00:03:20.200 --> 00:03:22.680
...when they learn...made an error

00:03:22.680 --> 00:03:27.080
they owned up to it the issue corrections and now it's like the new york post and others

00:03:27.080 --> 00:03:30.860
in mega media they often do everything they can to avoid

00:03:30.860 --> 00:03:33.120
...corrections to own up to their mistakes?