I am part of a group of 65+ political scientists and media scholars who today gave birth today to a new organization that responds to the civic emergency we are living through: The Election Coverage and Democracy Network.

These are our recommendations. 1/ mediafordemocracy.org
This group came together very quickly. We held one Zoom call, found we were on the same page, and set to work. The goal was to take what we learned as scholars and researchers and give non-partisan guidance on best practice to the people who are reporting on this election.

2/
I am proud of what we produced. The first recommendation is: "Deny a platform to anyone making unfounded claims."

Or this one: "When voters and election administrators are the protagonists of election coverage, the public wins." More here: mediafordemocracy.org 3/
This isn't media bashing. Our statement says, "We hope these recommendations—based on decades of research into electoral processes, news coverage, and public opinion—support the important work journalists are doing to cover the election and safeguard democracy."

4/
Why did we come together to speak as one voice? Because "the news media are the primary way the public learns about politics," and "journalists have the power to profoundly shape public trust (or distrust) in the election process." And we have knowledge relevant to the task. 5/
American democracy is at a dangerous moment. One of its strengths is people know how to self-organize without waiting for the nod from above. Our group of scholars had great leaders and zero arguments. The needle on the pettiness meter never moved. This was itself inspiring. 6/
What can you do? Well, read and share our statement. Alert your local media to it. We have people from 40+ universities around the US— and in other countries. There's probably a member near you. Maybe your newsroom needs a political scientist on call. mediafordemocracy.org 7/
People are telling me, "you're a little late." Yeah, you're right. We should have been out with this 3-4 weeks ago. Simple fact is, no one thought of it. We were doing our own things. 8/

Here's one of mine: thecitizensagenda.org

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jay Rosen

Jay Rosen Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jayrosen_nyu

6 Oct
Some of you know I have been pushing an alternative approach to election coverage, the "citizens agenda" model. It is slowly starting to emerge at the local level (the national press is not interested.) Here is @WBEZ in Chicago putting it into practice. wbez.org/stories/wbez-c…
The editor of the @bangordailynews is @DSMacLeod. He writes in to say his newspaper is also taking a "citizens agenda" approach. "Here's our coverage so far..." bangordailynews.com/topic/citizens…
The "citizens agenda" style is different in two ways. 1.) the voters —struggling to get their concerns addressed — are the protagonists; 2.) coverage starts by asking them, "what do you want the candidates to be talking about as they compete for votes?" pressthink.org/2019/06/key-st…
Read 4 tweets
22 Sep
I may be proven wrong, but I think the debates will be a fact-checking fail. Nothing like a real time check on Trump's firehose of falsehood will unfold. At best we'll see symbolic pushback on one or two lies, and his reaction will introduce more lies. 1/
Some reasons I think that: the sheer volume of lies Trump is able to broadcast in a single answer to question about, say, mail-in voting; the blowback from his defenders that each moderator knows is coming if they try it; the asymmetry factor, meaning— cjr.org/political_pres… 2/
— it will feel like bias if Trump is corrected a lot and Biden is not for lack of cause; the manifest need to move on; the weak precedent set by White House correspondents on live fact-checking (true, the debates are a different setting, but even so...) cnn.com/2020/08/20/pol… 3/
Read 11 tweets
16 Sep
Most of you know me as a press critic. But I have other lives as a professor at NYU. I teach grad students about innovation in journalism. I study the digital transformation of the press. And I run projects that agitate for change.

This thread is about those latter lives. 1/
I have a new post up at my blog, PressThink. "Notes on membership." pressthink.org/2020/09/notes-… It explains what I have learned about membership and the search for a sustainable path in journalism after three years as director of the research project I founded, @membershippzzle. 2/
Today's a big day in the life of @membershippzzle. We launched The Membership Guide, based on three years of study. Here's an introduction to what the Guide is and does. membershippuzzle.org/articles-overv… It's not a research report, but a practical tool for doing membership at your site. 3/
Read 7 tweets
23 Aug
Here's an example of local TV (@WNEP, an ABC affiliate in Scranton, PA) getting duped into covering a QAnon event as a "just folks" demonstration against human trafficking. These events happened all over the country today.

wnep.com/video/news/loc…
Another local TV station (@WOODTV in Grand Rapids, MI, an NBC affiliate) duped into covering a QAnon event as "people gather to protest human trafficking." woodtv.com/news/grand-rap…

Maybe check if your local station did the same. Marches like these all over the country today.
Some context from NBC reporters who have been tracking it: QAnon looms behind nationwide rallies and Save the Children hashtags. nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news… "Local media coverage of the events has been widespread and credulous, almost never mentioning the events' QAnon connections."
Read 13 tweets
17 Aug
Just published: my NEW post.

"From emergency to active threat: We have again switched settings in our coverage of Donald Trump." pressthink.org/2020/08/from-e… Written in the style of an editor's note explaining a shift in coverage. I hope you will read it— and tell me what you think.
By moving on the Post Office, Trump escalated the crisis in journalism.

"It’s more than a civic emergency; it’s a national crisis. News coverage has to reflect that. We can’t just cover these events in bigger type. We have to take commensurate action." pressthink.org/2020/08/from-e…
Take everything you were going to spend on the conventions and put it toward a threat modeling team. Then reorganize your campaign coverage around their findings.

One of the recommendations in my new post, which is styled as an editor's note to readers. pressthink.org/2020/08/from-e…
Read 4 tweets
13 Aug
This tweet by @Yamiche demonstrates the "truth sandwich" method of reporting false or dubious claims. First state what is true. Then introduce the truthless or misleading statement. Then repeat what is true, so that the falseood is neither the first impression nor the takeaway.
If you're new to the "truth sandwich" concept, or wondering how it applies in this case, here's my thread from a few months ago that may help.
Speaking clearly and bluntly, NBC's White House correspondent @GeoffRBennett shows NBC's social media team that it needs to learn the "truth sandwich" method for reporting a false or misleading claim. via @BGrueskin
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!