The “Civic Connector” is a daily online forum during the 66th Annual National Conference on Citizenship. Each day, NCoC.net will feature commentary from a civic sector leader. These discussions will contribute to conversations throughout the Annual Conference Events.

The September 19 commentator is Jim Newton, Editor at Large of the Los Angeles Times. Jim’s “Civic Connector” question was “Citizens have the freedom and ability to easily access many types of information from many different sources. Since often, there is no gatekeeper of this information, how can validity be ensured?”

__________

The short answer to this provocative question is that validity, sadly, cannot be ensured. Indeed, it’s already a mess.

To cite just one example: There is a popular notion, widely reported in any number of forums, that Los Angeles is a “sanctuary city,” meaning that the city provides safe haven for those in the country illegally. That’s patently and provably false. The Los Angeles Police Department routinely cooperates with federal immigration authorities, regularly identifies suspects in its custody who are in the country illegally and turns them over for deportation. Yes, the LAPD has a policy of not stopping anyone solely based on suspicion of their immigration status – that’s to encourage witnesses and victims to cooperate with police – but it does not protect anyone from prosecution or deportation.

That’s easy enough to check. Here is a link to the LAPD’s 1979 order that spells out the rules. But just because it’s false doesn’t stop others from reporting it – some, no doubt, because they believe it, others because it’s in their interest to deceive.

It doesn’t seem to me that misunderstanding or willful deception are likely to disappear anytime soon, so validity will continue to be a commodity. But that’s always been the case, and the antidote in the years ahead may look a lot like the answer in years past: Discerning readers, those genuinely in the market for the truth rather than merely affirmation of their views, will turn to sources whose records are proven over time. They may not be newspapers as we know them, but they will do the work that newspapers traditionally have done.

In some ways, the proliferation of bad, self-interested and slanted information only deepens the thirst for the real thing. The job of real reporting going forward will combine uncovering hidden facts – what investigative reporters have done from time immemorial – with correcting false ones, the new market created by the proliferation of blather and propaganda. Over time, readers will gravitate to those organizations that search out the truth and that, when they make mistakes, forthrightly acknowledge them. What remains is for those organizations to develop a new model for monetizing that business, for translating demand into revenue that can, in turn, pay for the reporting that readers still want and need.

To return to the misapprehension about Los Angeles’ immigration policies, that bugaboo may continue to infect political discourse, but at least there’s counter-point available as well. On Aug. 26, the Los Angeles Times’ lead editorial convincingly debunked the notion. That may not ensure validity every time, but it’s a start.

_________
You’ve heard what Jim has to say, now we want to hear from you... “Citizens have the freedom and ability to easily access many types of information from many different sources. Since often, there is no gatekeeper of this information, how can validity be ensured?”