On July 10, a front page article on page one of the New York Times was headlined ‘”Foreign Actors Aim to Exploit Divide on AI.” The article cited examples of false content created by foreign governments that were AI generated and appeared on American social media sites.
Because of the prevalence of AI-created content, it is more important than ever for PR practitioners to check multiple sources when gleaning information for their use. This is particularly true when the subjects are controversial, as are the current Mid-East wars.
Even though people differ about the Israeli–Palestinian situation, there is one lesson that all PR practitioners should remember: never rely on one source for information when crafting programs, writing speeches or forming an opinion, because it has become difficult to determine what is true and what is misinformation provided by propagandists. And never accept anything on social media platforms as being truthful without doing extensive investigation.
What you read in the daily newspapers and is labeled as “breaking news” on the cable political TV programs has long been described as the first draft of history. That’s because after the fog of “breaking news” clears, later convergence often contradicts what was initially reported.
The Israeli war against Hamas and Hezbollah provides many examples of initial reports that had to be amended. So does the U.S-Israeli war against Iran.
Arguably, one of the prime examples of making certain that what you disseminate to the media is accurate was magnified in the early days of the Israeli-Hamas war, when on Oct. 17, 2023, major news outlets reported that an Israeli airstrike killed at least 500 Palestinians who were in a hospital, despite Israeli spokespersons immediately saying that the explosion was caused by a faulty Palestinian missile, which was later confirmed after U.S. and British intelligence intercepts were made public.
The above example was based on information from a Hamas spokesman and received major print and TV coverage for several days. It wasn’t until Oct. 23 that the New York Times reported, “The Time’s initial accounts attributed the claim of Israeli responsibility to Palestinian officials, and noted that the Israeli military said it was investigating the blast. However, the early versions of the coverage — and the prominence it received in a headline, news alert and social media channels — relied too heavily on claims by Hamas, and did not make clear that those claims could not immediately be verified. The report left readers with an incorrect impression about what was known and how credible the account was.”
The Wall Street Journal, which also published articles based on Hamas claims without checking its veracity also ran corrective reports.
In most cases, once the corrections are acknowledged the matter is usually closed. But not always. For PR people who provide misinformation to journalists, doing so can have a disastrous effect on an individual’s career.
Here’s why:
- If a journalist uses misinformation in a report provided by a PR person, the reporter will not trust the individual and stop using information from the individual.
- A journalist who has received wrong information might tell his colleagues, who will put the PR person on a “watch list.”
- Journalists who receive bad information would stop reaching out to the PR person for information
- Also, journalists who used to reach out to the PR person to provide a client to provide a quote for a story will stop doing so.
- If the PR person is in the “placement” department, losing a contact(s) could lead to a job loss.
Here are rules to make certain that your program or speech does not contain erroneous information:
- Never use information from the internet. Much of it is not factual.
- Never use information that you see on social media. Much of it is written by people with an agenda and is not factually correct.
- Never use information that you saw in a newspaper. It can be wrong.
- Never rely on information that you heard on television. Much of the “breaking news” reported on television has not been checked for accuracy. The same is true in early editions of newspapers.
- Never include information from clients until you check to make certain that it’s accurate.
- Spend a few hours at a library researching information from different sources to make certain that information in your program or speech is factual.
- Books by prominent authors and historians have been checked by publishers before publication. That’s a good source, but do not use any “facts” in books written by political activists or politicians. Rely on historians.
- Major magazines also are a good source because, unlike daily newspapers and TV reports, articles are fact checked before being published.
- Never ever use “facts” from on-line encyclopedias. It’s possible that political activists are providing the information. However, encyclopedias from long established and respected publishers that we grew up with are a good source.
- Some reporters will call and say that they are on deadline and ask for additional information. Never wing it. Always say, “I’ll check on it and get back to you.” Remember, a reporter’s deadline is not your problem.
The worst thing that can happen is when a reporter uses inaccurate information provided by a PR person that results in a printed or an on-air correction. That’s an embarrassing situation both for the reporter and the news outlet and is certain to affect your relationship with the journalist.
If after you send information you learn is incorrect, always immediately let the journalist know. That will prevent the journalist from being blindsided if called on the carpet by a higher-up and will benefit you for being truthful.
