With the discoveries in the past several weeks that two recently published memoirs were fakes, there’s been an increased focus in the news on fact-checking, something that magazines do routinely but that appears to be largely absent in book publishing. (See “Gang Memoir, Turning Page, Is Pure Fiction” in the New York Times and “Best-Selling Holocaust Tale Untrue, Author Admits” in the Washington Post.)
Since the 1950s National Geographic has had a rigorous research, or fact-checking, process, with a staff of researchers dedicated to the magazine’s publishing the most accurate, truthful information possible. This is not because we don’t trust our writers and photographers. We do trust them; they are among the world’s best reporters and journalists. But everyone can make a mistake, hear something incorrectly, be misled by a published source (perhaps a book that hasn’t been fact-checked?), or have an editor inadvertently introduce an error.
So our researchers diligently verify all that we publish. Not just the basic facts of names, dates, statistics, and superlatives (should we really say that Antarctica, not the Sahara, is the largest desert on Earth?), but also details of complex scientific research, subtle nuances of language (is it truly “cannibalism” if a nudibranch eats a member of a species other than its own?), identification of places, people, and objects in our photographs. (The next time I write about research, I’ll take a more humorous slant and tell you some of the amazing and amusing statements researchers have tackled.)
Though we sometimes verify a quote by reading it back to the author’s source, more often than not we will send it in writing to the source, often including the surrounding text in order to show the context. We do not change a quote for editorial reasons—in fact, we publish quotes despite sources’ objections if we have sound backup—but we do correct factual errors and delete problematic material.
Because of the depth and thoroughness of our research, there’s usually a learning curve—or should I call it an acceptance curve—for first-time writers at the magazine as they get used to our research. Most come around on subsequent assignments to a full appreciation of the support they get from our staff. After all, our writers and photographers are experienced journalists who care as much about getting the facts right as do the researchers.
Yes, there’s sometimes tension—perhaps when a researcher looks at a statement too literally or an author lets his or her writing style veer toward hyperbole. Yet this is the kind of creative tension that results in a top-quality story. The interaction between researchers and writers today is the most positive I’ve known in many years.
My entire career has been in research at National Geographic, which I’m happy to say continues to value stringent research, even in these days of declining circulation and staff cuts. It’s hard for me to imagine how those memoir book editors could have been hoodwinked. But what concerns me even more is what the public thinks. Does the ordinary person care at all about truth and honesty and accuracy? Are readers disturbed by fabricated memoirs? Or is there such a pervasive cynicism about the press, accompanied by an acceptance of embellishment for the sake of entertainment—or maybe education—that none of this matters? I sincerely hope not, but I wonder.
What do you readers think?
My Shot
Daily Dozen
Voting Machine
Puzzles
Desktop Wallpaper
Buy NG Photos
Special Issues
Comments
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
thanks for this info. many newspapers here in Indonesia neglect the importance of research.
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
It's interesting to consider if we the gentle readers are disturbed by partial or complete fabrication. While memoirs fall under autobiography, I have to admit that I interpret these two words very differently. An 'autobiography' brings with it a much higher set of standards in terms of picking apart memories to come to the truth of the event, whereas 'memoir' connotes a subjective and sometimes superficial coverage of an event. I would even say it's the difference between an 'event' and an 'experience.' My thoughts on this could be entirely influenced by recent discoveries of fabricated articles and books, some of which are even defended by the author as being written in a fantastic style (You caught me lying, but I *meant* to do it). Whether it should be considered a betrayal between the author and the reader perhaps comes down to topic: Is the true purpose of the story to inform the reader of life in a specific time and place, or to share the internal experiences of a person (the author)? If it is the former, the expectation is a true and accurate description. If it is the latter, the expectation is always subjectivity. Given that, the line between unanalyzed memory and pure fabrication might just be a matter of degree.
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
Ma'am,
I think people put their trust in this magazine so writing the real facts is probably on of the best qualities of National Geographic. I personally, being a great enthusiast of your magazine, very often use to tell about my friends about different articles that I’ve read or interesting facts that you write about.. how do you think I would feel if it would turn out to be false. My only hope is that this will never change and there will be always someone there to let us know the truth.
Yours truly, Dan.
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
I am really grateful for the fact checking at National Geographic. These days it is easy to access opinion, information and ideas. It's great that so many people can get their ideas out there, but having National Geographic as a source I know has been painstakingly proof read and fact checked is wonderful.
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
Thank you fr your article by Roger's Rules of Order. It is consoling or those f us who are teaching young people to know without a shadow of a doubt that what is printed in the National Geographic is correctb ecause of Robert's staff. One of my students iw writing a letter to the writer of the article Inside Animals minds. She is speaker of a second language who is eager to become more proficient in the English Language. Your magazine is a treasure trove for beginning writers.
Our contest will be over by next week is it possible to just sned the letter to Virginia Morell through the National Geographic website or should she send it through the mail?
Thanks again for your contribution to the world of knowledge that we have before use each and every day.
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
Hello, Gwen.
Sorry I haven't been monitoring my blog in the past week or so. I just saw your posting. Your student could send a message for Viginia Morell to ngsforum@nationalgeographic.com.
Thanks for your comments.
Mar 10, 2008 3PM #
Dear Ms. Rogers,
Thank you for this insider's view of research and fact-checking for National Geographic Magazine.
I am particularly interested in how NGS researchers go about the task of fact-checking. Does the researcher work entirely by herself, or does she receive a file from the writer or editor, and is there collaboration among other researchers in the office?
The question arises because it seems to me that if a researcher has to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, much precious time can be lost, but if she is given source material, she can then track down facts and verify them in a much more efficient way than having to start from square one. This would be the case, in particular, I would think, while researching images. It's very labor intensive to research and find an image in the first place, and I would think that it would be extremely arduous for the next person to come along and attempt to duplicate the efforts of the first. I may be wrong, but I don't think so.
Cheers,
Steve Moyer
Post a Comment