Do you remember the Bloomberg article about Big China Chip Hack? About Apple was been refuted, debunked, and ridiculed. See https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/10/04/editorial-a-year-...
France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
11–20 of 270 posts
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#12In today's world of race to the finish (/ bottom) journalism, I think it should be mandatory for all publications to have an addendum to each article, which contains: * list of sources of information and original research conducted ( including names of interviewees, only anonymized with a justification, links, etc ) * a sign-off by a journalist (note: not supposed to imply responsibility or liability for accuracy of…
> list of sources of information and original research conducted
This is something that is ostensibly already in a typical article. Or are you suggesting that the reporter list everything that was researched, and every one who was talked to, regardless if it made it into the published version of the article?
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#13In today's world of race to the finish (/ bottom) journalism, I think it should be mandatory for all publications to have an addendum to each article, which contains: * list of sources of information and original research conducted ( including names of interviewees, only anonymized with a justification, links, etc ) * a sign-off by a journalist (note: not supposed to imply responsibility or liability for accuracy of…
Well-respected publications have internal checks and balances that do all these things for investigative stories already. You seem not to know enough about how the journalism industry has solved these issues to make a proposal.
The system does work fairly well. Screw-ups of investigations and scoops are big news because they're rare among serious journalistic outfits.
No individual journalist wants to be known for getting a story wrong, so incentives are pretty strong to begin with.
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#14Bloomberg literally compensates its writers for moving markets. So, the super micro case, this one and many others before these..no surprises here.
It seems like that would make it extremely to keep journalistic integrity while working under such a compensation / commission structure.
How are you supposed to trust a Bloomberg article when the writers are designing them specifically in a way to try and purposely move the market? They would have every incentive to exaggerate, embellish, and even go so far as lie as shown in this instance.
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#15Here's an article from 2016 that seems to contemporaneously describe the incident at hand: https://web.archive.org/web/20161123142234/https://www.bloom... > Vinci SA fell victim to a fake release claiming the French builder had fired its finance chief amid accounting irregularities, prompting the stock to plunge before the company denied the report. > Bloomberg News was among the few news organizations to report from…
> “We are a victim of a hoax,”
Vinci was the victim of a hoax, Bloomberg was happy to report it without doing enough fact checking, they were spreading and part of the hoax.
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#16So Bloomberg got caught out by a fake press release and got fined - what happened to the originator of the fake press release?
France has a problem /history with anonymous poison pen letters.
Sounds to me like some one was settling scores and Bloomberg got caught I doubt that a French equivalent of Bloomberg would have been fined.
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#17Doesn't this violate the freedom of speech?
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#18Here's a non-paywalled version via Reuters (who, it should be said, is a Bloomberg competitor in the financial news space): https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-amf-bloomberg/fran...
Here's a more in-depth explanation from 2017 (the incident happened in 2016): https://www.complianceweek.com/the-vinci-code-fake-news-pres...
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#19In today's world of race to the finish (/ bottom) journalism, I think it should be mandatory for all publications to have an addendum to each article, which contains: * list of sources of information and original research conducted ( including names of interviewees, only anonymized with a justification, links, etc ) * a sign-off by a journalist (note: not supposed to imply responsibility or liability for accuracy of…
> list of sources of information and original research conducted This is something that is ostensibly already in a typical article. Or are you suggesting that the reporter list everything that was researched, and every one who was talked to, regardless if it made it into the published version of the article?
I think providing only the used sources is enough and the journalist should do all what is reasonable possible to find the original source of a news, so avoid speaking about something they read/heard from X and X said he read/seen from Y and Y from Z , the journalist should try to find the original source(if possible). For things that should remain anonymous they should describe how credible is the source and content.
Re: France's AMF watchdog fines Bloomberg €5M over Vinci hoax
#20Doesn't this violate the freedom of speech?
I am not saying it necessarily applies to this case, but France, like all countries in the EU, does not have actual freedom of speech.