I reported the news in print and online. Here’s the difference.

Former NYTimes executive editor Jill Abramson dissects the big problem with internet news.

JILL ABRAMSON: The expectation of really all people now is that they're going to know what happened the instant it happens. And that's great when the information is accurate. I think the downside of just so many stories circulating at any given microsecond is that people feel somewhat overwhelmed by news and it's hard to focus your attention on what stories are most important when they're exploding at you.

Usually now reporters break their stories on Twitter before they've even written a finished story. First, that nuance and perspective and analysis can be completely lost in that first quick and dirty version. But worse, there can be big factual mistakes which has contributed to the very low trust numbers that all news media companies have right now, which is very distressing to me because it opens the door for President Trump to rant about fake news and call journalists the enemies of the people, when they're like the heroes of the people, because they risk their lives to dig out the information that is vital for people to know. When I started as a reporter, in the Stone Age of course, the newsroom was I always thought it would be like Jimmy Olsen and Superman, and that you'd hear typewriters clacking and people shouting. And I was surprised at how quiet at least the Wall Street Journal's newsroom in Washington was. And there was no internet at that point. And the rhythm of the day was usually in the morning and through the afternoon, you were out reporting. You were finding sources, going to hearings, meeting secretly with people who might give you documents. And really you only got around to writing your story at about 6:00 PM. And the deadline, you could set your watch by it every night, was around 9:00 because the rhythm of newspapering was completely governed by when the presses rolled. And they only rolled once a day unless the Earth blew up and then you stop the presses and replayed it. But it was a slow pace. And the Journal, when I joined up, didn't even have a weekend paper. So Friday, it was really an easy day because the next paper was Monday.

And that all changed in the late 1990s with the advent of the internet. And the Wall Street Journal was one of the first newspapers to create an online version of itself. And that meant that the printing presses didn't figure into when your story went up. Although in the early years, it was ridiculous, it was true at The Times, too – we maintained that same schedule of just doing one final story a day at night and then having it posted on the web, for years. But the advent of social media completely changed that. And what had become a much faster pace where at The Times we were posting early versions of any important story on NYTimes.com. And with social media it was the instantaneous report. Like, get something up on social media to begin attracting the eyeballs before you even have a story up on the website. That began to actually scare me when I became Washington bureau chief of The Times, and the Supreme Court had just – it was night time – decided Bush v Gore decided what would happen next, if anything, and who would be president. And the instant TV analysis on CNN and other cable outlets was wrong. And Linda Greenhouse, she was The Times' totally experienced, brilliant Supreme Court reporter, rushed back to the office. She had read the decision in a cab. And the first thing she said to us when she arrived was, turn off the TV. Because she knew they were blathering idiocy. And then she told us, it was over. Bush won.

And that night so stuck in my mind. And roll the cameras forward to the decision on Obamacare, when I was executive editor. I wasn't calling the Washington bureau to say: 'Have that story first. The second there is a decision, I want it up." I was worried about the opposite. I was worried about a repeat of that Bush v Gore night. And my instructions were: Until the Supreme Court reporter and the Washington bureau chief call me and say they're sure and it was, you remember, a close decision we are not putting anything up. And if quite a bit of time goes by, we'll clue in readers that we're reporting the story for them. But we're not going to do a quick draw McGraw.

  • Jill Abramson, former executive editor of The New York Times, describes what life was like for a journalist in the 1980s – a "stone age" when news was governed by the printing press schedule.
  • Today, many journalists will break stories on Twitter before writing it, eliminating nuance and increasing the chance of error.
  • Social media in particular has added a fatal speed to journalism. Errors erode public trust in the media, and allow those in power to undermine the free press.


The real numbers behind abortions in the United States

How many abortions are actually performed? Numbers reveal the complexity in the raging debate.

Getty Images.
Politics & Current Affairs
  • The American society is close to split on the legality of abortions.
  • 45,789,558 abortions were carried out in the U.S. between 1970 and 2015.
  • The abortion numbers are at an all-time low now, trending almost half of what they were.
Keep reading Show less

7 most valuable college majors for the future

The most valuable college majors will prepare students for a world right out a science fiction novel.

Harvard University
Technology & Innovation
  • The future of work is going to require a range of skills learned that take into account cutting edge advancements in technology and science.
  • The most valuable college majors in the future will prepare students for new economies and areas of commerce.
  • Mathematics, engineering and science related educational majors will become an ubiqitous feature of the new job market.
Keep reading Show less

Cheers! How the physics of fizz contributes to human happiness

The phenomenon that makes our favourite drinks bubbly is, alarmingly, the same one that causes decompression sickness in divers. Why do we still love it?

Surprising Science

Think of the last time you had something to celebrate. If you toasted the happy occasion, your drink was probably alcoholic – and bubbly.

Keep reading Show less