[Editor's note: You'll start seeing more mashups on The Washington Post site the next month. Staff are being trained to use a new mashup maker tool I made that churns out decent maps in 5 minutes flat. Just like in print, normal rules about accuracy in reporting apply. The bottom line, don't show more location detail than you know to be true, as this blog post from InfoGraphicsNews illustrates. Thanks Laris!]
Republished from the InfoGraphicsNews blog.
Original on 12/04/2008.
Yesterday, the terrosrist group ETA killed another person in Spain. In this cases, as most of the cases, internet media have the initative. The first idea is to place the new. Shw where it took place. But the problem is that in this kind of news all the information is changing all the time during the first hour, and the data are not accurate. Yesterday, we only knew that Ignacio Uria was killed while he was going to his favourite restaurant, Kiruri. We didn’t even knew if he came form his house or form his job.
The punch line:
None of those that placed the killing on a exact place were right.
Some rectified later, others didn’t even change it. Being the fastest can’t go before telling the truth. On reconstructions many editors use to say that “the reader know this is not exactly the truth, that we’re just guessing”. I don’t want the reader to not trust us. I prefer to have a reader who really think that when we say something we know it and we’re not guessing.
These are screenshots from some spanish websites two hours after the agencies gave the news: