Consider the source

Central to information exchange, past or future, is the old saw: Consider the source. News media credibility is eroding. Some people still trust mainstream news media, or public radio and television. Others trust "alternative" media, or publications of such interest groups as Common Cause, the Heritage Foundation, or People for the American Way. However, a majority of Americans — and Puget Sound area residents — say they still get most of their news from local television.1

What does that imply about the quality of information most of us have? Aren't we all interested in a better information base than the "if it bleeds it leads" mentality of local television? Don't most of us desire a higher standard of coverage than that of recent school shootings, the Versace murder, Linda Tripp's allegations about Monica Lewinsky and the president? Will there be thousands of Internet gossip sites like "The Drudge Report"?

In fact, the whole question of "sources" and the ethics of what can and should be reported as fact is coming under review in an age where anything can be posted on the Internet. Journalists say they are searching their souls as they learn the skills of computer-assisted reporting: conducting Internet searches, citing on-line references, and so forth. The Internet actually offers reporters a wider range of sources than they had access to before, but as anyone who has used the web knows, the quality of sources varies wildly. Reporters' ability to verify sources and ensure authenticity will become even more important. But will it be valued? Individuals and organizations — including media of all types — have their own biases. The way the see reality is determined by their experience, their goals, their agenda. The Internet allows the widest diversity of points of view to be published. But, central questions remain: Whom do you trust? How do you find the voices you trust? Can you trust them over time? (The Internet actually gives print news consumers easier tools to check out journalists and reporters: citizens can use on-line news archives to look at specific journalists' reporting over time and see if it squares with what they understand to be truth. Likewise, the Internet gives reporters a way to quickly search for information and pull out conflicting viewpoints on a given issue area such as foreign policy or homelessness.)

Already, existing news organizations are forging a presence on the web by posting stories on web pages or by creating news hybrids like MSNBC. Their ability to synthesize information, check facts, and authenticate sources gives them a leg up as "name brands" in the new information environment. They may become the new facilitators of community conversations. But today, some citizens and not-for-profit organizations are creating their own communication futures. As Seattle Times Editor Mike Fancher put it at the end of a 1998 seminar on journalism in the 21st century, "The balance of power is shifting from the makers to the consumers of journalism."