I remember that I did post a comment when the story about Foxconn first came out and after I had heard the retraction I began to think about the nature of news reporting and what makes a new story accurate. I find the idea of differing and multiple perspectives important and I try my best to infuse this idea into the curriculum I teach. Hearing Rob from Marketplace talk about how most people believe the stories they hear on NPR, because they think of a it as a trustworthy source, unless you are conservative and are a fan of Rush Limbaugh as opposed to Ira Glass, but even then you still expect stories presented as news reports to be accurate. When I first heard the This American Life story on Foxconn, I believe it like mostly everyone else because I trust NPR. Another reason I think this particular story was received with less skepticism at first is because it confirms what people suspect or already believe about China, including me. Most Americans believe that the Chinese economy uses underage workers and treats them poorly. We have assumptions and our assumptions were confirmed. It also helped that the story was told in such way that had it an emotional resonance. Fudging news stories to make them more compelling or to further a particular agenda was something from the turn of the last century, but the fact is that has always been a problem and people should always listen with a skeptical ear, especially if it supports your political or philosophical bent. I look for bias in news reports, but I don't always expect lies.
.
