Accuracy – scenario

age by Henning Mühlinghaus released via Creative Commons CC BY-SA 2.0
Image by Henning Mühlinghaus released via Creative Commons CC BY-SA 2.0

There has been a strike at a steel works.

The union claims all its 100,000 members were out on strike, but the employer says 50% turned up for work and defied the picket line.

You were reporting from the main gates of the steel plant all day and you didn’t see anyone crossing the picket line.

You witnessed the mass meeting after which all those taking part left and walked away from the steel works.

You didn’t see any action inside the factory grounds; it was clearly at a standstill with nobody but security staff on site.

So, the company says half the staff have defied the strike action, but the trades union says all its members were on strike.

How do you report the situation?

Do you:

  1. Accept the union’s line and say that there was a 100% turn out for the strike.
  2. Accept the company’s line and say that 50% defied the strike call.
  3. Offer both versions and keep quiet about what you saw because it contradicts what has been said and could confuse the audience.
  4. Offer both versions, admit you can’t confirm which is right or wrong, but describe what you saw in detail.

Suggested action

It would probably be best to go with option 4 and offer both versions, admit you can’t confirm which is right or wrong, but describe what you saw in detail.

Why option four?

As a reporter all you can do is report what you have seen and what you have been told.

You can attribute comments to those who made them, and add your own eye witness account of events.

You should say what the union leaders and the steel plant owners say happened – it is not your role to edit their claims.

However you also have a responsibility to describe what you saw happening around you.

In this case you could report that all the workers you saw moved away from the plant after the mass meeting, and that all you could see behind the factory gates were a few security guards patrolling the premises.

You should not directly contradict either of the claims made by the opposing sides in the dispute.

And you should not report in such a way that suggests one side or the other is attempting to mislead the public.

However, by setting out the facts as accurately as possible you will be doing your job as a reporter, even if it is obvious that the versions offered by the management and union leaders can’t both be true.

To sum up, your journalism must be:

  • well-sourced
  • supported by strong evidence
  • examined and tested
  • clear and unambiguous.

Related training modules

Accuracy in journalism

Fairness in journalism

All the scenarios on Media Helping Media are based on real events.

David Brewer
The author of this piece, David Brewer, is the founder and editor of Media Helping Media. David has worked as a journalist and manager in print, broadcast, and online. He was the managing editor of BBC News Online when the site launched, the managing editor of International EMEA setting out the editorial proposition, hiring staff and overseeing the launch, the managing editor for the launch of CNN Arabic in Dubai, and a launch consultant for Al Jazeera English in Qatar. He has spent many years delivering journalism training worldwide, mainly in transition and post-conflict countries. He is currently mentoring journalists and editors of refugee and exiled media and helping train journalists in countries where the media is still developing.