Trusting News’ Post

Journalists, there might be words lurking in your stories that are turning off your audience 👀 You already know you need to consult a style guide to ensure you're using the right words when you're writing about certain topics, such as abortion, race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, homelessness, and disability. But the folks at Trusting News have asked news consumers what signals indicate that a news story is unfair. The respondents often point to words that journalists might not give a second thought to, such as “surprising” or “unapologetic.” At a time when trust in news is at a record low, every word counts. That's why we've partnered with Trusting News to offer this advice and more in Stylebot. Learn more here: https://lnkd.in/gkeTC-6s And check out Trusting News' list of potentially polarizing words at the link in comments.

An interesting reading, in which P. Kim Bui puts it aptly when she describes in the interview with the situation for journalists of color by saying: “Couple 'I can't fail’ with ‘I don't know how I got here. It's a mistake,' [and] it becomes a really bad spiral.” This accompanied by Ruchika Tulshyan and Jodi-Ann Burey’s artice “Stop Telling Women They Have Imposter Syndrome” in the Havard Business Review: “The impact of systemic racism, classism, xenophobia, and other biases was categorically absent when the concept of imposter syndrome was developed. Many groups were excluded from the study, namely women of color and people of various income levels, genders, and professional backgrounds. Even as we know it today, imposter syndrome puts the blame on individuals, without accounting for the historical and cultural contexts that are foundational to how it manifests in both women of color and white women. Imposter syndrome directs our view toward fixing women at work instead of fixing the places where women work” (Link to https://lnkd.in/eMku9FWZ) shows the importance of applying a intersectional lens when we want to understand the situation of journalists as actors in societies. Add to the aforementioned points e.g. the quite different working environments for journalist in urban and rural environems (local journalism). #Journalism #Journalistsofcolor #Intersectionality

In addition to her work championing women’s rights, Lucy Morgan, purpose editor and deputy website editor at Glamour, is also a great supporter of freelance writers. “I know what it's like when you sent a beautiful pitch off, you sent a follow-up, and this editor, who you perhaps have spoken to before and you've met, isn't responding. I don't want to be that editor… There's more freedom for them. But in terms of that regular work coming in, there's a lot more insecurity, and we need to be mindful of that.” If you want to pitch Lucy and editors like her, keep in mind the following: ▪️ Tailor your pitches to align with their content preferences. In Lucy’s case, her focus revolves around topics like women's empowerment, books, female health, and more. ▪️ Personal, first-person stories are valuable. Presenting unique, hard-to-get, and relevant stories can intrigue journalists and boost the chances of your pitch being accepted. ▪️ Include sources that are well-suited for the topic and possess genuine expertise. Lucy stresses the importance of sourcing true experts in women's health, reproductive health, and other specialized fields. Here more from Lucy in this week’s episode of #CoffeeWithAJournalist ☕ : https://hubs.ly/Q02lJHN80

Fact: I love working with journalists. Another fact: Many of the journalists we work with want to interview disabled young people and their families, through our work with the Disabled Children's Partnership. This is so important, as their stories need to be heard. One more fact: It takes A LOT of energy, time, bravery, preparation, thought and planning for a disabled young person, or their parent or guardian, to do a media interview. If a journalist hasn't had much experience in this kind of reporting, they might not realise this. So Sam Carlisle has written this brilliant blog, with excellent contributions from Isaac Harvey MBE, containing loads of helpful advice and pointers for journalists who want to interview a disabled young person, and/or their parent or guardian, on how to make sure that interview is a success. Newsrooms are flat out, production schedules and shoots are manic, the news agenda moves at breakneck speed. But some simple preparations - like being punctual and explaining clearly how much time you need - can make all the difference. If you're a journalist, editor, producer, researcher, writer, director, student or just someone who's curious about any of this, then you can read more here 👇 https://lnkd.in/eeYtxuX8

Why are people so angry on X/Twitter? Everyone I have talked to recently has said how it’s a cesspit, but they feel they need to be on it as it’s a good way of reaching journalists. The online world often amplifies emotions, causing people to say things they wouldn’t in real life or face-to-face. The anonymity and distance provided by social media can make it easier to express frustration and anger without considering the consequences. This environment can create a breeding ground for hostility and conflict, making it seem like a place where anger is the dominant emotion. In reality, many of these interactions stem from the frustrations and challenges we face in our daily lives. Online platforms can become an outlet for these feelings, but the lack of immediate, personal connection often leads to a breakdown in empathy and understanding. Democracy thrives on informed and engaged citizens. Knowledge is key, especially when it comes to influencing policy. This is why I started Policy360: Unplugged, a platform dedicated to learning how to effectively influence and engage with policymakers. If you want to understand the intricacies of policy influence and make a real difference, listen to Policy360: Unplugged here: https://lnkd.in/e-F2rxvP Let’s strive to bring more kindness and consideration into our online interactions and work together to build a more positive and constructive digital community. It’s time to bridge the gap between online behaviour and real-life decency. Pic: Ellen & chatting to the marvellous Lisa Caldwell ChartPR FCIPR before an Equality Commission meeting.

Reinforcing democracy and transparency are core principles at The Bureau of Investigative Journalism One of the reporting strands we launched last year focuses firmly on mis-information ~ exposing hostile agents pushing dangerous narratives in the run up to a UK general election. Led by our formidable Big Tech Editor Jasper Jackson [and now that a date of 4 July has been set] you should definitely take a read of our new years blog from The Bureau’s Editor Franz Wild about the importance of this work. Civic engagement is equally important to us, so we also launched a Social series on Insta & Tik Tok. And, like any good citizen, we care about working alongside communities, and we set up a WhatsApp Influence Ops tip line to involve them in our work. The Bureau is an independent newsroom with amazing talent and high ambitions. We are also a non-profit organisation and your support ~ by becoming a Bureau Insider ~ will help us keep going with this kind of deep, public interest journalism. https://lnkd.in/eJd2TQSC https://lnkd.in/erDV_R56 #transparency #accountability #misinformation #democracy #elections #community #publicinterestjournalism

It’s time for U.S. journalists to renew their claim as the Fourth Estate. Let’s start by avoiding the mistakes of the past. Celeste Headlee, acclaimed journalist and author, and founder of Headway DEI Training, has examined what we’ve done wrong and what we’ve done right while covering politics in an election year. And we’re ready to share. We’re offering two downloadable guides and bi-monthly live webinars from now through October to help the media review, reflect on and improve how we cover elections. Learn how to stop causing injury and be a positive force in this democracy. Tuesday, March 12 is the first of several webinars from now through October to assure that we serve our audience with integrity and help them to be empowered, informed humans. Each hour-long workshop for the media focuses on either covering the election without damaging democracy or how to cover political speech without amplifying dog whistles. The session includes 15 minutes of Q&A. The cost to register is $19. The accompanying downloadable guide is included with registration or may be purchased separately on our website for $8. During the How to Cover Elections Without Damaging Democracy webinars, learn how to cover politics in a manner that leads to a more informed electorate, disempowers bad actors in the system, and fuels trust of professional journalism within our audience. During the Covering Political Speech Without Amplifying Dog Whistles webinar, learn how to become sensitive to political parties’ attempts to manipulate us through our unconscious biases and damaging stereotypes. Registration link & webinar schedules in comments. #HeadwayDEITraining #Democracy #ElectionCoverage #Election2024 #NoHorseRace #MediaEthics #UnbiasedMedia #PoliticalSpeech #CoveringPolitics #FourthEstate #Discrimination #WorkplaceDiscrimination #ImplicitBias #Microaggressions #Inclusion #DiversityEquityInclusion #DiversityInclusion #EmbracingDiversity #InclusivityMatters #DEIBTraining #DEIFacilitation #WorkplaceBelonging #Neurodiversity #InclusiveWorkplace #DEIClassesOnline #DEIB #Equity #Nonprofits #Neuroscience #Racism #RaceTalk

Many women fear the “motherhood penalty” where women pay a price in the workplace for becoming moms. However, this might be less severe than we thought, with a new study determining that having children contributes “little to nothing” to the persistent gap in earnings between men and women. While this is encouraging to hear, the US still has a long way to go, as it remains the only country in the industrialized world without federally funded paid leave. Research shows that universal child care and moderate-length paid leave can help women stay connected to the labor market. Offsetting loss in job earnings and continuing to push for a cultural shift toward fathers’ contributing more towards domestic labor can continue to invalidate the motherhood penalty. #WorkingMoms #WorkingMothers #WomeninBusiness

TW: Violence against women Family pay tribute to 'thoughtful' carer found dead in Bury (8 Sep 2024 - BBC) Murdered woman found dead by her son, court hears (24 Aug 2024 - BBC) Vulnerable girl found dead at man's home (24 Oct 21 - BBC) What do all of these headlines have in common? They are all about women or girls who were murdered by men. But what else? The journalists use passive voice in the headlines Passive voice is used to avoid putting blame on any individual. It also changes the meaning of the sentence. Here's an example: The dog bit the man. The man was bitten by the dog. In the first example, the inference is that the dog is at fault for biting the man. In my head, this event was unprovoked. The dog bit him. In the second example, the man was bitten... but why? What was the man doing? What made the dog do this? This raises more questions than it answers. The media uses passive voice all of the time, especially when talking about controversial topics such as male violence against women. The headlines at the start of this post put the victim at the forefront of the story, thus putting the onus on them for dying - they wouldn't be dead if it weren't for a perpetrator. They were not simply 'found dead', they were killed. As a copywriter, I avoid passive voice wherever possible, because it impacts readability. It makes things harder to understand. So, why are we still seeing this in the media? This isn't the only instance where we see perpetrators saved from blame through passive voice, but if I go into that *certain* topic on here, no one will see this post. I wrote about the state of womanhood in this week's newsletter, which I will link below. I am also interested in hearing any other examples of the selective use of passive voice in the media. #journalism #passivevoice #writing

"A Sept. 2 Facebook post (direct link, archive link) claims a news outlet counted more than 100 lies from Vice President Kamala Harris during one of her speeches. "CNN just released their fact check of Kamala Harris’ speech at the DNC Convention,” reads part of the post. “It turns out Kamala Harris lied 113 times within her 37-minute speech.” Other versions of the claim spread widely on Facebook and X, formerly Twitter. More from the Fact-Check Team: How we pick and research claims | Email newsletter | Facebook page Our rating: False CNN fact-checked four claims Harris made in the speech, not 113. CNN article fact-checked Harris, Pennsylvania senator A CNN spokesperson directed USA TODAY to the news outlet's fact-check of Harris’ Aug. 22 speech, in which she accepted the Democratic presidential nomination at the party’s convention in Chicago. The article only examined four claims from Harris, not over 100. It checked claims she made about the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision and what tax breaks and abortion access would look like under a potential second term for former President Donald Trump. Notably, the article didn't say Harris lied in those cases. Rather, it said several of her statements could use additional context and, in the case of what would happen under a second Trump administration, that the vice president was "making a prediction that we cannot definitively fact check." The story stated that Trump had not endorsed some of the policies and positions Harris attributed to him in the speech. The article also included a fact-check on a claim by Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. Bob Casey related to inflation, bringing the total number of claims to five. The CNN fact-check story noted the evening's speeches "focused more on biography, big themes, subjective arguments and uncheckable promises and predictions rather than factual assertions." Fact check: No, Kamala Harris didn't 'back out' of Sept. 4 debate USA TODAY has debunked an array of social media claims related to CNN, including false assertions that a CNN clip shows President Joe Biden talking about resigning as president in 2024, that the network aired its live presidential debate in June with an extended delay and that it announced it would no longer have live audiences at town hall events in May 2023. USA TODAY reached out to several users who shared the post for comment but did not immediately receive a response. Lead Stories and Full Fact also debunked the claim."