Assume they did and the principal claimed it was fake. What do you do?
I'm asking for real here. I don't know the right answer. Do you not publish anything that someone involves calls a fake or do you publish it anyway?
I'm asking for real here. I don't know the right answer. Do you not publish anything that someone involves calls a fake or do you publish it anyway?
Perhaps if there were a pattern of behavior behind the clip, supported by other testimony from the speaker's colleagues or previous incidents--not that it's the responsibility of journalists to conduct a trial in the court of public opinion, presenting the strongest arguments from each side--but, lacking any actual effort at all to establish the credibility of the source, this is just lazy, click-counting, ragebait--not journalism.
Partly, it's also on the laziness and gullibility of the general public--but these are well-established features of the audience that should be no surprise to a trained journalist. To publish such clips without any real work to validate them is basic negligence.
Or words to that effect.