: Do the math…Help with “experts”…
Yesterday, I gave an interview to a newspaper (I’ll let you know when something’s published) based on my status as an “expert.” It’s the three-little-letters thing.
The quote marks indicate that: 1) I’m uncomfortable with the term as (if) it applies to me, and 2) You can find an “expert” to claim just about anything. Or not. For example, a reporter, who happens to be an acquaintance of mine, called frantically on deadline four years ago needing a quote about rhetoric in regard to political commercials in the 2000 campaign. What this reporter wanted me to say I could not say. Recent studies claimed otherwise; I said so, and my voice never saw the light of print.
Now, if I’d had an agenda…
Jeffrey A. Dvorkin, the ombudsman for NRP, writes about expert sources–especially those who come pre-packaged with an overt ideology, i.e. think-tankers of a certain sort. About journalism’s reliance on such experts, he says:
In my experience, the rapid growth and instant availability of experts are — in part — due to the information explosion on the Internet. There is more raw information out there and less time to make sense of it. Harried journalists faced with conflicting information and ever-encroaching deadlines tend to put opposite points of view into their stories, then hide behind the false populism of “let the audience decide who is right.”
The problem is, obviously, that it’s difficult to decide without help. Shouldn’t journalists offer that help? (But that would violate the fairness bias.)
You got that right. I worked as a journalist & tv producer for nearly 30 years. Believe me, we do shop for experts all the time and often set out to find someone who will say what we want to be said. There’s nothing wrong with that, in my view, unless one is trying to misrepresent fact or theory about an issue.
Far more disturbing to me was the hawking of a supposed expert, either by self-promotion or via PR representations. Steve Emerson, self-proclaimed terrorism expert who appears frequently on CNN is one of those self-promoting types. His knowledge and opinion is often questionable.
Jeffery Dvorkin, CNN’s ombudsman, has been the subject of much discussion in recent days. It seems he’s less open to comment and criticism than one might hope. Some email exchanges demonstrating his disregard for opposing opinion, framing his disrespect for bloggers, and general ill-mannered correspondence can be found at Media Whores Online and Atrios’ site, Eschaton.
http://www.mediawhoresonline.com/
http://atrios.blogspot.com/