Media beware, all you have is your credibility

BuzzFeed drew a tongue-lashing from President-elect Donald Trump last week for publishing a 35-page bombshell document with inflammatory allegations about his ties to Russia.

Disclosing the Trump dossier, with its errors and unproven claims, reflects BuzzFeed’s principles “to be transparent in our journalism and to share what we have with our readers,” editor Ben Smith said in a memo to his staff. But many journalists and media critics were nearly as negative as Trump about the move.

Once again, it comes down to credibility — the only real currency journalism has.

Absolutely no one would disagree that journalism has deep, debilitating credibility issues. It’s gotten so bad in this fractured, highly polarized political climate that mainstream journalists simply cannot afford to make any serious mistakes or seriously questionable judgments.

Think of it as the “zinger theory” of marriage, which sees a relationship like a bank. Both partners are continuously making deposits and withdrawals. For every nice deed, one point is deposited. One zinger, though, wipes out 10 points. It’s the zingers — the mistakes or misjudgments — the public remembers.

In the case of journalism, we are all married to each other. When one outlet makes a mistake or misstep, all are tarred.

Despite doing groundbreaking work during the election, The

Washington Post had two big zingers recently. What makes it worse is that Post editors won’t say why either mistake happened.

Readers got a kick out of a front-page cover of the Post’s free publication, Express, on the upcoming Women’s March. It featured a crowd shaped as the male symbol instead of the female one.

On Dec. 31, the Post made a far more serious, inexplicable mistake. “Russian hackers penetrated U.S. electricity grid through a utility in Vermont, officials say,” read the headline. The officials were unnamed, the utility was never contacted, and it turned out the incident involved one laptop unconnected to the grid.

CNN fed the media mistrust machine with a documentary on the rock band Chicago on New Year’s Day. It was produced by the band. Specifically, by a band member’s nephew who directed and edited the film. Yes, at the end, a credit said it was produced by Chicago. But why not tell viewers upfront?

What’s desperately needed are far fewer mistakes and misjudgments and far more transparency about newsroom decision-making. Above all, journalists need to be much more careful. Make more positive deposits and fewer zingers, please. Our credibility depends on it.