I need to know about your source.
Hm!?
Sshhhhh!
Your source.
I need to know where I can find your source.
Oh! Ketchup?
Chilli?
It's time to talk sources,
and no, not this kind.
A journalist's sources are much more important.
In fact, you could say they are the main ingredients
of any news story.
A source is basically anyone or anything that provides information,
whether it's an eyewitness...
WAITRESS: Table seven...
..an expert,
a report,
an email,
or a video.
We tend to divide those sources into two groups -
primary and secondary.
Primary sources provide direct and firsthand information.
So if you wanted a primary source on, say, sauce,
you'd talk to this guy.
He made it so he can tell you how it was put together
and exactly what's in it.
Lots of salt.
Then you've got your secondary sources.
They take information and interpret it, evaluate it and discuss it.
Oh, yuck! That's disgusting.
This guy didn't actually make the sauce
or see it being created,
but he can still provide us with information about it.
There's too much salt in this!
Again, Boris! How many... Ugh!
Often news stories use a variety of sources - primary and secondary.
But the quality of those sources can vary a lot.
(COUGHS DISCREETLY)
And it's up to us as news consumers
to be aware of where our news is coming from
and not just follow what we're served up.
You're not taking that to customers, are you?
Take this headline, for example.
"Zombie Attack Imminent."
Sounds pretty alarming, right?
But before you start stockpiling weapons and canned food,
take a closer look at the source.
(TENSE MUSIC)
(KNIFE BEING SHARPENED)
Who says the zombies are coming?
Who said that?
If it's Nigel here, maybe don't panic just yet.
He's not exactly an expert.
Yeah, but I spend a lot of time on the internet.
Uh, that doesn't count, Nigel.
He doesn't have the evidence or the expertise
to know that hordes of undead
will soon be trying to feast on our sweet, juicy brains,
and he really shouldn't be quoted as a credible news source.
Now, if this same story came from an expert source -
say, someone who's spent his or her life
studying possible world-ending scenarios like zombie apocalypses -
then you can take it a bit more seriously.
It appears to be a mutated form of LQP85 virus.
Take this source, for example.
An acute to a persistent infection...
He's got a coat and some letters after his name,
so he's probably smart.
But that alone doesn't make him a good source.
What he really has going for him is that he's an expert
in the exact field that this story is about - zombie viruses.
To sufficient cell density.
Now, over here are the host subjects
which I infected with the virus earlier.
That's curious.
I'm sure there were two rats here this morning.
Wait, what?
Still, he's only one source and he might not be right.
There's no need to panic.
Unless, of course, he's backed up by other credible sources.
(ZOMBIES SNARL) (SCREAMS)
AAARGH! Zombies!
So if you've got multiple sources
with expertise and authority on the issue,
and they agree on something...
..then it's much more likely to be true
than if you hear it from just one source.
I told you! I TOLD you!
(SCREAMS)
Paying close attention to news sources can help you know
whether or not the news you're reading is reliable.
But the truth isn't always as obvious
as flesh-eating zombies.
Oi!
You'll often find stories with multiple credible sources
that just don't agree.
And to a woman with two cats...
But first we cross to a man with a dog for a face.
And there could be good reasons for that.
It might be that there's genuine academic debate.
As I've been saying for years,
it's clear that video games are turning our children into zombies.
I think you'll find it's television
that's turning our young people into zombies.
Well, that's what YOU say.
Or maybe sources clash because the science isn't quite in yet.
Here's a cytoplasm. Looks like LQP85 to me.
But of course we'll have to run some more tests to be sure.
I think you'll find it's actually a microbiome.
We see a characteristic...
Or it could be that sources are offering opinions, not facts,
and in that case, journalists should provide multiple points of view.
I think the zombies are actually pretty awesome
and, like, I've been getting ready for this for, like, years.
I think these zombies are just here to take our jobs.
It's a zombie invasion.
I know he's a zombie but we're very much in love.
Stop...stop...stop it.
We just got married. It was a beautiful wedding.
Of course, he ate my parents. But what are you gonna do?
After all, it's not a journalist's job to decide what the truth is.
It's his or her job to report on the truth.
But when it comes to sources,
you should be aware of something called false equivalence.
That's when the news presents arguments from different sources
in a way that makes them seem equally valid even when they're not.
Hello and welcome back to False Equivalence.
I'm Don Worthington.
Joining me to talk about the zombie apocalypse is forensic pathologist
from the Centre of Disease Control, Dr Lisa Larken.
Hi.
And newspaper columnist and noted zombie sceptic, Amanda Boloff.
Amanda. I'm gonna stop you right there, Don.
Clearly this whole zombie outbreak is just a myth
that's been created by the fake media and the government.
What? Are you kidding?
They're everywhere.
We can't even leave the studio.
Sure, Lisa. That's fine.
You tell yourself that in your echo chamber.
We can't leave the studio! La-la-la.
Stand-by, camera three.
(SNARLING)
(CAR HORN BLARES, ZOMBIE SNARLS)
The Australian public needs to listen to people
with qualifications, like me. 98...
You also need to be aware of biased sources
which might have their own reasons for saying what they say,
perhaps because they have some kind of affiliation
with the people, company
or...brain-eating creatures in the story.
Plain and simple, it's science.
Well, if the zombies do exist then they deserve to be given a fair go.
Just a bit peckish.
Wait - what!? Are you eating brains?
No! It's...sushi.
That's why it's important to know as much as possible
about your sources.
But if what your source is anonymous?
Hey!
Anonymous sources are people who provide information
to journalists on the condition their identities stay secret.
MAN: Were you followed? I don't think so.
Did you bring the documents?
There can be really good reasons for a source
to want to stay anonymous.
You know I could lose my job for this.
Some really big and really important stories have been uncovered
thanks to an anonymous tip-offs.
But they can also be dodgy.
After all, if someone's not going on the record,
there are fewer consequences for them if they get it wrong.
There have been times when journalists have reported
anonymous tip-offs without checking up on them
and got the story very wrong.
Are you sure this is true?
And finally, let's talk crap.
(TOILET FLUSHES)
CRAP stands for:
And it's a good thing to remember when you're assessing sources.
Currency.
Think about how recent the information is.
Reliability.
Is it from a primary or secondary source?
And are they reliable?
Authority.
How much do you really know about the source?
Are they an authority on the issue?
Purpose.
Think about why the source is giving you the information.
Are they biased?
Is it fact or opinion?
So remember to think about sources when you're consuming news.
It'll make you smarter, more informed,
and ultimately more...satisfied.
Captions by Red Bee Media
Copyright Australian Broadcasting Corporation