Helen Thomas Quotes

Just because you read a report in the 'New York Times,' the 'Economist,' or, yes, 'The New Yorker' doesn't make it true. But we do know that a few people have evaluated that story with what strikes me as fairly objective standards of reason.

Once we thought, journalists and readers alike, that if we put together enough 'facts' and gave them a fast stir, we would come up with something that, at least by the standards of short-order cooks, could be called the truth.

I think it's time for the people and the press, in particular, to be more vigilant about not giving equal weight to lies as they give the truth.

The essence of American journalism is vulgarity divested of truth.

I was taught that newspapers were supposed to find out if rumors were true, and if not, not print them.

More and more, journalism seems to have hopped out of Truth's pocket and crept into another.

As a journalist - or as a writer - my obligation is to come as close to the truth as I possibly can. And that's not as close to someone else's truth, but the truth as I see it.

If you are a journalist, check and double-check your sources. Don't just swallow what politicians tell you.

I consider what I do on Deadspin to be based in the foundations of journalism, yes, based on the foundations of journalism that I have been trained and that I certainly use when I write for GQ and The New York Times and so on. Certainly, I think the language can be a little looser on the web, but I am held to the same standards and accuracy everyone else is.

See, I have no journalism in my background, so I wasn't practised at research or writing non-fiction, nor at handling the truth in a journalistic way. Journalists know when to call a halt and write something, but I kept on looking for answers.

I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are.

You shouldn't presume that all quotes that are in a magazine or a newspaper are accurate.

Readers appreciate the truth. Why say, 'Some think a situation is a mess?' Based on my reporting, if a situation is a mess, then I say that. The truth is always what reporters tell each other when they get back to the newsroom.

Science doesn't care, by and large, what the answers are. It's only interested in getting the right answer. And journalism should be very much that way.

I don't claim to be a journalist. I hold myself to higher standards of transparency and disclosure.

There is a long-standing tradition in the mainstream press of middle-of-the-road journalism that is objective and fair. I would hate to see that fall victim to a panic about the Fox effect.

The first duty of a newspaper is to be accurate. If it be accurate, it follows that it is fair.

Fact-checking doesn't exist primarily because some of us are liars and cheats. It exists because writers will be writers, much as they may mean to be historians.

Journalism has changed tremendously because of the democratization of information. Anybody can put something up on the Internet. It's harder and harder to find what the truth is.

I just love when the Internet is wrong. It's the only thing that will save journalism.

I have yet to meet very many people in the press who are really, truly interested in writing a good story or getting at the truth. Most press people, when they come into an article, have an angle that they want already, so they need points to support that angle, whatever the angle may be.

I do think the biggest problem newspapers have is loss of trust, and I feel that's a result of failure to speak truth to power.

People may expect too much of journalism. Not only do they expect it to be entertaining, they expect it to be true.

A good journalist is not the one that writes what people say, but the one that writes what he is supposed to write.

Just because it's in print doesn't mean it's the gospel.