I don’t think it’s fair to call journalists lazy, but I do think they lack sufficient skepticism, and the result is indistinguishable from lazy journalism. When they are handed a story, wthether in the form of leaks or tweets or press releases from an organization, too often they run with the story at face value with putting it in context, or even considering if it merits a story at all. Or, in the case of Trump tweets, whether they are true.
Trump has claimed or been given credit for a number of things by journalists since the election, while the truth is either more complicated or the opposite. The latest example is stopping the House GOP from changing the ethics rules. Trump didn’t oppose the changes, and wasn’t a major factor in the House backing down; Offices being flooded with constituent calls made the difference. But many news stories gave Trump the credit, despite the plain language of his tweets agreeing with their move, just disagreeing with the timing.
Jay Rosen has urged a move towards evidence based journalism rather than accusation based journalism. He has more good suggestions for journalists in the age of Trump, though many apply in any time. Trump has just made many of the problems of journalism impossible to ignore.
sherrivotes.org 