[cross-posted at Moving at the Speed of Creativity]
eSchoolNews has a fantastic letter from the editor regarding the federal government’s recent evaluation of learning software for schools.
The editor lambasts reporters’ overblown headlines, inappropriate and
overbroad conclusions, and failure to adequately criticize and
critically reflect upon the report and its accompanying publicity
There was a recent dust-up at Dangerously Irrelevant as well regarding information sources for Did You Know?.
As we all do our own original writing or write about others’ work,
these are important reminders that we need to be careful, thoughtful,
and appropriately critical before we put information out into the
easily-searchable, publicly-findable blogosphere.
I had posted about this as well, (http://futura.edublogs.org/2007/04/05/baby-with-the-bathwater/) and then some discussions on Ning by Sylvia Martinez had brought some of the faulty headlines to my attention.
I agree the editorial is well done. It was astonishing to see the interpretations of the study as presented by the headlines. (not to mention frustrating!)
Given that journalists recently have come under scrutiny for ethical issues and the fact that most news sources are financially motivated, is it unreasonable to think that individuals through web 2.0 tools are serving the traditional role of watchdog? What does this mean for our free press?