We’re having a fascinating debate about media credibility surrounding Michael Jackson’s death.
George said he didn’t really believe the news until he saw an item by the LA Times. Mike, Andy and I disagreed — when TMZ broke the news, we said, that was credible for this arena.
TMZ is in the celebrity gossip business, that’s their milieu, and they have the sources. For that particular item, we said, TMZ is as credible as the LA Times — maybe even more so.
But George points out that there’s an additional layer of complication in the form of the bogus report — circulating yesterday, the day of Jackson’s death — that actor Jeff Goldblum had died on a movie set in New Zealand.
So, on the same day, you’ve got two reports of celebrity deaths by non-mainstream news organizations: one true, one false.
What do you think? Who can we believe? Did you trust TMZ with the Jackson news?
June 26th, 2009 - 11:23 am
It’s hard to trust just one single news outlet, whether it’s mainstream or not. When the news first broke, every outlet was citing the TMZ report and not their own sources. When the LA Times report came out and confirmed it with their own sources, then it became more believable because two news organizations had confirmed it.
June 26th, 2009 - 11:27 am
I do agree that a report becomes more credible as additional organizations confirm it.
But in this case, I still maintain that I personally had no cause to doubt the initial report from TMZ. That’s just me.
June 26th, 2009 - 11:48 am
You can never really know anything for sure. Either way all the radio stations are playing M.J. right now and I love it.
June 26th, 2009 - 11:52 am
Adding to this discussion, over at DaringFireball.net John Gruber has written up a very insightful post on journalism sourcing and credibility in response to the Wall Street Journal running the story earlier this week that Steve Jobs reportedly had a liver transplant.
Gruber found this news unusual that the WSJ posted no source to this information but posted the story confident as a reputable news publication. Other news outlets were sourcing the WJS immediately after in the same way TMZ was sourced to yesterday’s Michal Jackson news.
TMZ had listed sources yesterday saying: “A source inside the hospital told us there was ‘absolute chaos’ after Jackson arrrived. People who were with the singer were screaming, ‘You’ve got to save him! You’ve got to save him!’”
You can read John Gruber’s full post here: http://daringfireball.net/2009/06/wsj_steve_jobs_liver_transplant
June 26th, 2009 - 12:03 pm
When I first heard of MJ’s death yesterday I made sure to cite TMZ as the source before passing the info along and took it with a grain of salt. Considering they’re an info-tainment celebrity gossip outlet I figured that, compared to other news orgs., they had less to lose if they were wrong and a lot to gain if they’re right so they’ll be more inclined to shoot first and fact-check later. They broke the story and at the same time I just didn’t want to believe it actually happened and hoped they got it wrong.
As for the Jeff Goldblum rumor it goes to show Twitter/the internet’s lightning quick reach considering the story got shot down as quickly as it came up.
June 26th, 2009 - 12:08 pm
If the second confirmed source had been Perez Hilton or Popsugar would’ve I still been skeptical? Yes. I needed to see CNN, AP or the LA Times confirm it. As John pointed out when we were talking, if TMZ had been wrong, they probably could’ve gotten away with an “oops, our bad – we jumped the gun” excuse. Could the LA Times have used that excuse and not faced a major controversy. Absoluetly not. TMZ could have been even 80% sure it was true and would’ve probably reported it. The LA Times couldn’t have reported even if they were 99% sure. TMZ got the publicity for being the source to break it, and they wanted to be able to make that claim.
June 26th, 2009 - 2:14 pm
It’s true, the traditional media are hampered by their standards.
If TMZ had been wrong, they would have shrugged it off. A little egg on their face, but not the kind of thing people would have blasted them endlessly for.
If a mainstream newspaper or TV station made that mistake, however, people would be all over them brutally.
June 26th, 2009 - 6:10 pm
I disagree with the contention above that TMZ, as an “info-tainment celebrity gossip outlet,” would have less to lose, compared with other more mainstream news organizations, if it were to get a high-profile scoop wrong.
I’ll be the first to proclaim that what TMZ does it trashy, but damn it, TMZ does it well. TMZ lives for moments like this because it gets as much of the spotlight as the subject of the breaking story. As soon as TMZ’s trashy-but-reliable stories become less reliable, you’ll start to witness the death of TMZ.