- Thread starter Chip
- Start date
Errors in the Dominican Press
Dominican Optimism???
Governmental (imposed) Interpretation??
Lack of FULL understanding??
Desire to enhance the facts, hide the facts or just downright cause a screw up of the facts??
In fairness though, Dominican reporting IS getting better. At least now it sometimes gets to be thought provoking, journalists ASK a few more awkward questions & keep hassling longer before they get the stupid (& non committal) response obligatory in Dominican politics!! ~ Grahame.
You don't know half of the story.
Errors is the bread and butter of that industry, particularly errors due to speculation.
The interesting part is that journalists in the DR often write a story based on what he/she thinks is the case and not on facts.
There also tends to be a negative slant in many stories.
-NALs
I have noticed this but why is it? Is it because of sensationalism, carelessness in investigating, problems with translating or something else?
If it is for sensationalism I also don't understand what there is to gain with having non front page articles replete with errors. Maybe they really don't understand the right, duty and privelage they have as an integral part of a democratic society to disseminate facts, not half truths. This is not to say this doesn't happen anywhere else, just the percentage of errors seems high to me. Maybe there are no checks and balances here like in other places. Then again, that is typical of the DR.
Few Only
In this country professionalism is very rare and not found in many people (of all trades and professions), so one should not expect it in journalism either.
(In my view it's due to lousy education and training, carelessness and lack of motivation.)
There are a few investigative journalists like Nuria and Marino Zapete (and some more) who do good work though.
Janin
In this country professionalism is very rare and not found in many people (of all trades and professions), so one should not expect it in journalism either.
(In my view it's due to lousy education and training, carelessness and lack of motivation.)
There are a few investigative journalists like Nuria and Marino Zapete (and some more) who do good work though.
Janin
Look at them as papers delivering news, nothing else. Most of them full of errors because most of their readers never question the story, they can get away with whatever they write. A typical reader of a Dominican newspaper don't analyze the story. They are still a source of information, I read a number of them almost every day (I don't read Gringo Times). If I don't believe what I read and it's an interesting topic I double or triple check it until I have figured out if there's some truth to it or not. Dominican journalism is not polished or perfect (journalists should learn how to do a spellcheck), but not all negative stories are bullshiit (I fooled your autocorrect again) they are surprisingly often true. I wouldn’t believe some of them if I was interested in the country because I just booked my first vacation ever to the “Dominican” but those with more than two years in the Dominican Republic in a continues push have seen “unbelievable things” taking place probably more than once. I wonder if the Baninter guys get 20 years ?lvarez Renta is in deeeep shiiit even Panama wants his ass.
Most people don't analyze the stories they read in newspapers, regardless of nationality or place where such story is being read. For example, remember the false story printed in the Los Angeles Times recently concerning the new trees being planted in Santo Domingo?
Almost everyone on this site agreed that much of that story was pure BS, but does the average reader of the LA Times know that? Probably not! Most people simply read and accept, read and accept, read and accept.
You try to show them facts and they respond "well I read in the papers..." or "I was told..." or "they say...", almost always implying that because what they read or heard came from a written source, that by default you are wrong and what they read is right. This is especially true when what they read or heard confirms a preconceived notion that they might have of their surroundings and how the country or the world functions.
Never mind the contradictions that arises as you show them the facts, even when the facts are data sets from the actual source any given story in any given newspaper is based on.
For example, recently (I believe it was last week) a news was posted on DR1 News regarding a story that was published in one of the Dominican newspapers. According to the report, over 11,000 new small businesses open their doors in the last year or so, while only 2,000 businesses closed.
Simply looking at those figures is a sing of progress and, given the positive numbers, would merit a positive news article or report. What do you think the journalist who broke that story decided to focus on?
None other than why did those 2,000 businesses that failed did so. Very little of the article was devoted to the increase in businesses activity, but rather focus on the negative.
They fixate their stories on the hole and completely miss the donut!
Newspapers are a source of misinformation that has to be taken with a grain of salt.
They don't always sell the truth, or even objectivity in their stories. They are in fact selling a commodity that is on an extremely high demand, a commodity that makes people feel good and/or helps them forget about their reality for a moment and that commodity is called entertainment.
In fact, I think there is a term that was coined as "infotainment" that refers to the globalized media that mixes half-truths with sensationalism and lack of objectivity with the purpose of achieving the greatest audience possible which inevitably leads to $$$$$$.
And this is something that is not exclusive of the DR, but rather is a global problem.
In this day and age, what the media says happened and what actually happened are two completely different things.
-NALs
I think we’re reading different papers. I know nothing about the story in LA Times and the trees in Santo Domingo. I would read LA Times only if I live in LA I don’t count on the international section in El Nacional either (if there is any) but since 95 % is local stuff I read it as well as Listin and Diario Libre (don't underestimate the importance of local knowledge). When I’m traveling I’m reading WSJ and FT not because I have 10 million bucks in the bank but these are reasonably free for BS so I don’t have to turn my BS filter on.
That’s a story I wouldn’t buy I don’t believe it. Since I spend a lot of time in the DR I would expect I would have seen these 11,000 popping up somewhere, haven’t seen that but I haven't been to Barahona since 2002 so they may be clustered together there somewhere between Barahona and Pedernales.
So. How many years will ?lvarez Renta get? Will the [SIZE=-1]Panamanians[/SIZE] chew his ass? A poll. Did I hear a poll?<o></o>
That’s a story I wouldn’t buy I don’t believe it. Since I spend a lot of time in the DR I would expect I would have seen these 11,000 popping up somewhere, haven’t seen that but I haven't been to Barahona since 2002 so they may be clustered together there somewhere between Barahona and Pedernales.
So. How many years will ?lvarez Renta get? Will the [SIZE=-1]Panamanians[/SIZE] chew his ass? A poll. Did I hear a poll?<o></o>
If you think the spelling is bad have you ever double checked the basic math in some of the reporting...............?:laugh: Like you I read 5/6 online Dominican papers daily, like you I don't read the Gringo Times :laugh: and like you I practice what is known in research methodology as triangulation i.e. work away at it until the glimmerings of the real message come through. I find it an interesting exercise in reading between the lines - seems most educated Dominicans I discuss this with do the same, read between the lines rather than get fixated on accuracy/innacuracy. Of course it's a completely different understanding of 'journalism' from the understanding which places it alongside objectivity. But I don't know that journalists in that great country to the north are free of this either, when you consider editorial policies, owner policies, who supports whom politically, lobbyists etc etc.
What I like about the online papers with a readers' comments section is that sometimes the journalist writes the editorially 'acceptable' version in the article then goes to the readers letters and using a different name challenges the story............
Appeals to my sense of humour that does...at least it's a smoke detector..
Okay let's read them all see what's between the lines take the average of that and we're as close to the truth as we can possibly get :laugh:. At least when it's in the newspapers it got to be something they might be 180 degrees off but at least there's something going on:laugh::laugh: no smoke without a fire:laugh:. I love this country.
Hasta luego.
Okay let's read them all see what's between the lines take the average of that and we're as close to the truth as we can possibly get :laugh:. At least when it's in the newspapers it got to be something they might be 180 degrees off but at least there's something going on:laugh::laugh: no smoke without a fire:laugh:. I love this country.
Hasta luego.
Exactly! :laugh: Take the 'coup' story: maybe Claudio Caamano had had chats with coronels, maybe he hadn't but the message to government was clear enough - you lot had better realise there's a lot of unhappiness among the populace in general, people have had it up to here etc etc And very few would dispute that.
All this focussing on journalistic exactitude is so very.................first world, isn't it. Accuracy would rob us of our chance to get the old grey matter working. Who wants their news made easy? No challenge there............