Allowance of a Mistake

We all make mistakes. And, although some of them may not want to admit to it, apparently so do journalists with decades of experience.

RTÉ Chief News Correspondant Charlie Bird visited the University of Limerick as part of the Current Issues in Irish Media Seminar Series last week and admitted to a few of his own mistakes he had made throughout his career.

Charlie Bird asked us did we think journalism was an exact science. "To me, it is in a way," he said.

"To tell the truth and to get to the truth is a raw form of science," he said, "but the moral compass is the most important thing of all."

Charlie admitted he forgot the moral compass on several occasions, but realising you'd been in the wrong afterwards is half the punishment.

Speaking to a soon-to-be graduating class of journalists this honesty on Bird's part is invaluable. Ethics and fact-checking are two of the most important aspects of modern day journalism and these two elements of journalism are where a lot of mistakes are made.

The rate of which news changes can put pressure on the journalist to get the story and the facts out fast, before anyone else does. This can result in a lack of fact-checking and a weakness in credibility. But when a mistake is made, Charlie emphasised, the best approach is to tell the truth and apologise, letting it fester will not have a positive result.

Warning: Mistakes may be made

The most memorable example of this in recent media history is the RTÉ PrimeTime Investigates programme, A Mission To Prey. "Even a stupid name," Charlie exclaimed before recounting what he knows of the investigation.

"Of course RTÉ PrimeTime Investigate's name is tarnished," he said. And indeed it is.

We all do make mistakes. Journalists make mistakes. The pressure of a news story deadline can let anyone make mistakes. But a simple lack of fact-checking and a the irrational desperation to get a story out fast is not making a mistake, it's foolishness.

The sniff of a story that a priest may have an illegitmate child in Africa, a country he worked in as a missionary, would get any journalist excited. But to have a second source for such a libelous claim should have been mandatory. To simply take the woman's story as gospel, speak to her daughter about her experiences growing up and to feebly attempt to door-step the priest, Father Kevin Reynolds, was not enough for any journalistic standards.

If the man you are accusing of such a crime offers you a paternity test, surely the church bells would ring and choirs in your head would question his innocence.

Charlie Bird was not involved in any way with the programme's production and I regretted such a majority of the questioning focusing on the show, but it is understandable that people wanted to know how an RTÉ insider felt about such a mistake.

Charlie told us we all make mistakes. And we do. But mistakes cannot be used as excuses too often. Should I have been an RTÉ producer, I think I would preferred to broadcast a last-minute quick-fix change of a show and a public apology to the audience for the mistake in scheduling, than the unmeasurable defamation lawsuit that faces them now, as well as the loss of their investigative and journalistic credibility.

"Every country needs a public service broadcaster," Charlie said, "Someone watching, someone probing. People who work in a public service broadcaster are the custodians of society at any one time."

That may well be Charlie, band it may have been, but it will take some while for RTÉ to reestablish a custodian reputation in this country.