----CORRECTION----

A July 19 oped by Lorie Byrd (New Web site will keep track of questionable news stories) incorrectly reported that the Associated Press had retracted a story it ran in late November that six people had been burned to death during sectarian violence at a Sunni mosque in Iraq. Byrd also raised questions about the AP's source, police Capt. Jamil Hussein, saying that he could not be found and that his name was a pseudonym. In January, the Iraqi Interior Ministry, which initially denied Hussein's existence, confirmed that he was an Iraqi police officer and said he faced disciplinary action for speaking to the media.

In order to make even the most trivial of everyday decisions, it is necessary to have good facts. The public depends on television, radio and print media to deliver reliable and accurate information to help it make decisions about finances, purchases, voting, health care — even whether to plan a trip to the beach for the weekend.

For the most part, reporters and editors do their jobs and the result is an informed public. In some instances, however, the information relayed to the public is neither reliable nor accurate. Far too often, inaccurate information is reported and repeated until it becomes widely accepted. Fortunately, thanks to the increasing availability of technology, news consumers can now combat this phenomenon.

When inaccurate information is reported in the news media, especially when it is reported on the wire services and gets worldwide distribution, it is difficult to “take back” the initial report. A blurb in the “corrections” column on page A16 does not compare with the front-page headline attention the original (inaccurate) story often receives.

This story continues below
Advertisement

With the rise of new media such as talk radio and blogs, traditional mainstream media has come under increased scrutiny; some stories that in past generations might have been left to stand have been exposed as false. Today’s easy accessibility to computers and the Internet allows even those with little knowledge of the world of journalism to investigate and check the facts of the news they receive.

For example, in 2006 The Associated Press ran a story about six Sunnis who were doused with kerosene and burned alive while nearby Iraqi soldiers watched and did nothing. The source for the story was identified as Capt. Jamil Hussein of the Iraqi police force. The story received wide coverage and the alleged event was even cited by NBC News as the tipping point that led it to begin referring to the conflict in Iraq as a “civil war.”

Investigation by bloggers (beginning at a blog called Flopping Aces) revealed that not only was the story not well-substantiated, a “Capt. Jamil Hussein” could not be found, even though The Associated Press had cited him as the source for more than 60 other stories, most about Sunni-Shia violence in Iraq. Eventually, in reaction to questions from bloggers, much of the “Sunni burning six” story was retracted and it was later learned that “Capt. Jamil Hussein” was a pseudonym.

The way the story and retraction unfolded, and the fact that Hussein had been the source for dozens of other reports, led me to wonder if there was a place where suspicious stories and sources could be archived and tracked. Locating information was possible, but accessing many different sources could be time consuming. Unable to find one place where all information about similar stories was pulled together, I decided to create one myself.

After conferring with friends in the new media, including several who have uncovered other instances of inaccurate reporting, I decided to use a wiki format so that many individuals could combine forces to contribute information. The result was Media Mythbusters.com, a site where debunked news reports can be archived and tracked.

Before the site even launched this week, the format yielded results. When entering information about a story many news outlets reported last month about 20 beheaded bodies found in Iraq, I cross-referenced all other reports at the site relating to Iraq and discovered something interesting. Last year, a similar story was reported about 30 beheaded bodies found in Iraq. Both that 2006 account and the recent story were later found to have most likely been fabricated to influence public opinion by those associated with terrorists in Iraq. The ability to archive and cross-reference the information in one place made it possible to quickly see that the same type of attempt to manipulate the media in 2006 had been repeated in 2007.

Technology is making it possible for even those outside the world of journalism to find and process information. Hopefully, the result of thousands of potential fact checkers will be a more accurate presentation of news than has ever been possible before.

Lorie Byrd is a member of The Examiner’s Blog Board of Contributors.