ATM information source - Advanced Test Manager

Transparency is critical to our credibility with the public and our subscribers. Whenever possible, we pursue information on the record. When a newsmaker insists on background or off-the-record ground rules, we must adhere to a strict set of guidelines, enforced by AP news managers.

 Under AP's rules, material from anonymous sources may be used only if:

 1. The material is information and not opinion or speculation, and is vital to the report.

 2. The information is not available except under the conditions of anonymity imposed by the source.

 3. The source is reliable, and in a position to have direct knowledge of the information.

 Reporters who intend to use material from anonymous sources must get approval from their news manager before sending the story to the desk. The manager is responsible for vetting the material and making sure it meets AP guidelines. The manager must know the identity of the source, and is obligated, like the reporter, to keep the source's identity confidential. Only after they are assured that the source material has been vetted by a manager should editors and producers allow it to be used.

 Reporters should proceed with interviews on the assumption they are on the record. If the source wants to set conditions, these should be negotiated at the start of the interview. At the end of the interview, the reporter should try once again to move onto the record some or all of the information that was given on a background basis.

 The AP routinely seeks and requires more than one source when sourcing is anonymous. Stories should be held while attempts are made to reach additional sources for confirmation or elaboration. In rare cases, one source will be sufficient – when material comes from an authoritative figure who provides information so detailed that there is no question of its accuracy.

 We must explain in the story why the source requested anonymity. And, when it’s relevant, we must describe the source's motive for disclosing the information. If the story hinges on documents, as opposed to interviews, the reporter must describe how the documents were obtained, at least to the extent possible.

The story also must provide attribution that establishes the source's credibility; simply quoting "a source" is not allowed. We should be as descriptive as possible: "according to top White House aides" or "a senior official in the British Foreign Office." The description of a source must never be altered without consulting the reporter.

 We must not say that a person declined comment when that person the person is already quoted anonymously. And we should not attribute information to anonymous sources when it is obvious or well known. We should just state the information as fact.

Stories that use anonymous sources must carry a reporter's byline. If a reporter other than the bylined staffer contributes anonymous material to a story, that reporter should be given credit as a contributor to the story.

 All complaints and questions about the authenticity or veracity of anonymous material – from inside or outside the AP – must be promptly brought to the news manager's attention.

 Not everyone understands “off the record” or “on background” to mean the same things. Before any interview in which any degree of anonymity is expected, there should be a discussion in which the ground rules are set explicitly.

These are the AP’s definitions:

On the record. The information can be used with no caveats, quoting the source by name.

Off the record. The information cannot be used for publication. Background. The information can be published but only under conditions negotiated with the source. Generally, the sources do not want their names published but will agree to a description of their position. AP reporters should object vigorously when a source wants to brief a group of reporters on background and try to persuade the source to put the briefing on the record.

Deep background. The information can be used but without attribution. The source does not want to be identified in any way, even on condition of anonymity.

In general, information obtained under any of these circumstances can be pursued with other sources to be placed on the record.

ANONYMOUS SOURCES IN MATERIAL FROM OTHER NEWS SOURCES

Reports from other news organizations based on anonymous sources require the most careful scrutiny when we consider them for our report.

AP's basic rules for anonymous source material apply to material from other news outlets just as they do in our own reporting: The material must be factual and obtainable no other way. The story must be truly significant and newsworthy. Use of anonymous material must be authorized by a manager. The story we produce must be balanced, and comment must be sought.

Further, before picking up such a story we must make a bona fide effort to get it on the record, or, at a minimum, confirm it through our own reporting. We shouldn't hesitate to hold the story if we have any doubts. If another outlet’s anonymous material is ultimately used, it must be attributed to the originating news organization and note its description of the source.

ATTRIBUTION

 Anything in the AP news report that could reasonably be disputed should be attributed. We should provide the full name of a source and as much information as needed to identify the source and explain why the person s credible. Where appropriate, include a source's age; title; name of company, organization or government department; and hometown. If we quote someone from a written document – a report, email or news release -- we should say so. Information taken from the internet must be vetted according to our standards of accuracy and attributed to the original source. File, library or archive photos, audio or videos must be identified as such. For lengthy stories, attribution can be contained in an extended editor's note detailing interviews, research and methodology.

Lainie Petersen writes about business, real estate and personal finance, drawing on 25 years experience in publishing and education. Petersen's work appears in Money Crashers, Selling to the Masses, and in Walmart News Now, a blog for Walmart suppliers. She holds a master's degree in library science from Dominican University.

It is becoming extra important to be aware and think twice before accepting information from a given source on the internet or for example from another person. In today’s time anyone from anywhere can access any data within seconds.

With such ease in accessing information one would think that some core issues of the society like health and wellness, emotional well-being, etc. would and should Excellerate but unfortunately that has not been the case to a large extent. On the contrary, it can be observed that these core issues are on the rise. Onset of health problems from an early age due to misinformation/lacking awareness on food and nutrition is increasing at an alarming rate despite having the web of information that we can access easily today. If one is aware and mindful, then in true sense having this vast sea of information also poses a serious challenge for all of us.

There are many people / organizations that put out information that might be best for their self-interest but might not be good for the overall well-being of the society. These forces often mindlessly have an aim to make profits for their capitalistic agendas by willing to go to any lengths.

To set the points mentioned above in perspective, following are two examples that I have personally observed on a large scale. The lack of awareness on how important the food we consume is seriously alarming. People are putting “junk” in their bodies without even realizing what harm it does to them right away as it enters our system (we might not see the effects of such food right away, but it slowly builds up and ruins the body over time, taking us to the very point when onset of diseases start to happen). Now, a lot of times people are convinced that such food items are not that bad, and why, because information on internet backs that these foods are good for us. We fail to understand that the companies out there are analysing what pleases our taste buds, and then not a single thought is given further. The next steps for them are to directly come up with food items that are chemically processed (in a way that pleases our taste), manufactured, and packaged, and of course companies find ways to back and justify that these are good for us. Right away the chain of profits start coming their ways. At the same time, we continue to consume these without understanding that each time it enters our body, it is basically sowing the seed of diseases that start to come our way in a matter of time.

This leads us to the second example which is now as we start to have diseases because of consumption of such foods, our first response becomes to go seek treatment. From a young age we are prescribed medicines, and sadly we again feel satisfied that as we are having the medicine, we can continue to live the way we are. During this entire time companies / individuals who are selling such food items / medicines continue to earn big cash, but at what cost – cost is our health and fault is also ours, as we let them control us, and believe what they have to say without even a single question.

Therefore, a general rule of thumb could be to not believe and follow things that we see / read or are told blindly and mindlessly, while a reasonable approach could be to take a step back and not rush to come up with a decision right away. It is quite important to question new information, and then if anything makes sense to us, we can try to adopt it, and then further evaluate if it makes sense or not. It is crucial that we become very selective on what we are to incorporate in our lives.

As we see society might be having the set norms the way it does, it is important to not forget that we all as individuals are unique and different. Today, we are lucky that we have access to such data and information at no cost, but as we know with great power comes great responsibility. The responsibility at our end therefore becomes to identify and ensure that source of information has a genuine intent on improving and helping the society in becoming a better place to live, and direct us to push ourselves to live our lives to the fullest potential by becoming the best version of ourselves.

We all have the ability to question information, experiment with the information on ourselves, apply / adopt it if it makes sense, and then further evaluate if it is something to be incorporated in our lives on a sustained basis based on the experience we might get as we experiment with it!

END OF ARTICLE

Subscribe to the Daily Tech Insider Newsletter

Stay up to date on the latest in technology with Daily Tech Insider. We bring you news on industry-leading companies, products, and people, as well as highlighted articles, downloads, and top resources. You’ll receive primers on hot tech subjects that will help you stay ahead of the game.

Print Worksheet

Grade

Subject

View aligned standards

MUO 5/20/2023 Lindsay E. Mack

© Provided by MUO

ChatGPT and similar AI bots tell you to double-check health information they provide. However, choosing the best resources to verify this information can be tricky. Here’s how to find and use reputable sources for health information online.

1. Contact a Physician

For any serious or recurring issues, contact your physician or set up a telemedicine appointment. While ChatGPT can offer reliable health information, it can't replace a medical professional's evaluation of your particular issue.

When prompted, the chatbot itself will even reiterate this idea. Although AI technology will affect the future of healthcare in a number of ways, it isn't likely to replace the human component in the near future. For the most important medical questions, continue to rely on your personal physician or healthcare provider.

2. Rely on Established Medical Resources

Many medical resources available online provide reliable, reputable, evidence-based information. Even better, they present the facts in a straightforward way, making them more accessible to people from all sorts of backgrounds (not only medical professionals). These are some examples:

1. Mayo Clinic: The nonprofit medical practice and academic research organization is well known for providing extensive health information on many conditions, and it offers facts about treatments and preventive care as well. Use its extensive health library to double-check information about diseases, supplements, and even general lifestyle advice.
2. National Health Service (NHS): England's healthcare system, the NHS runs a website filled with plenty of articles on medication, general health topics, and current news. Research symptoms, learn about all kinds of conditions, and get more facts about mental health conditions here.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): This US government agency provides reliable information about diseases, vaccinations, and basic health advice. Use its resources to stay healthy while traveling, research just about any health topic, and get up-to-date data and statistics about everything from heart disease to diabetes.
4. World Health Organization (WHO): A United Nations agency, the WHO provides global health information, updates on the latest health news, and extensive research. Its Fact Sheets resource in particular presents all kinds of health-related data and facts in a simple, straightforward way, whether you're looking into animal bites or the Zika virus.
5. National Institutes of Health (NIH): One of the most prominent research institutions, the NIH provides comprehensive information about all sorts of health topics, clinical trials, and up-to-date medical research.

In addition, many hospital websites also provide general medical information. If you need to fact-check any medical advice from ChatGPT or similar AI chatbots, then these trusted websites can help you learn more about nearly any health-related topic.

3. Be Wary of Commercial Sites

If you're using online sources, then check the end of your resource's URL. If it ends in .gov, .edu, or .org, then it’s likely a nonprofit or educational website. For the most part, websites with these addresses provide beneficial information to the public for free.

Those that end in .com, or commercial sites, may also provide helpful information. In many instances, however, these sites are more focused on selling you something, according to the National Institute on Aging. If you're trying to fact-check other information, then a nonprofit or educational site may offer more neutral facts.

4. Use Apps With Care

When it comes to health apps, exercising caution is crucial. While official apps from hospitals and medical facilities are generally considered trustworthy, apps from companies or individuals may not always provide the most accurate or reliable information.

If you want to rely on an app, then evaluate the source, check out user reviews and ratings, and check for endorsements or certifications from reputable healthcare organizations.

In general, health apps should complement professional medical advice—not replace it. In this instance, they may not provide the best way to fact-check information from other sources.

5. Take Care With Personal Sites, Influencers, and Other Individuals

When it comes to the question of whether health and fitness influencers are beneficial or harmful to your health, there isn't a straightforward answer. In general, exercising caution is a smart idea.

While there are plenty of great medical professionals who offer helpful health information on social media or other sites, not every health and wellness influencer offers the most reliable information. For every influencer with expertise in their respective field, many others lack medical training or qualifications.

In addition, influencers may promote products or practices based on personal experiences or anecdotes, and these aren't always supported by research. If their claims don’t seem quite right, or they’re pushing products that offer a quick fix, then look for other resources.

If you want to go this route, then look for influencers who collaborate with reputable healthcare professionals, cite credible sources, and promote evidence-based practices. Be cautious of those who make bold claims, promote miracle cures, or provide information that contradicts medical knowledge.

If you’re trying to double-check information from ChatGPT or similar sources, however, then this may not be the best avenue in general.

6. Trust Your Gut

If your AI bot presents health information that doesn’t seem quite right, then trust your gut. Although these applications are incredibly powerful, they aren’t all-knowing.

In addition, AI hallucination responses—in which artificially intelligent chatbots present factually incorrect information in an authoritative manner—are still an issue. While there are ways to spot AI hallucination in a chatbot's responses, it can be tricky to separate the true information from the false.

In these events, take extra care to run the provided information by a trusted medical resource (or your own physician).

Use Trusted Resources to Double-Check Health Information From ChatGPT

When it comes to fact-checking health information provided by AI bots like ChatGPT, it's important to exercise caution and choose reliable resources. For any serious or recurring health issue, consult with a qualified medical professional for a personalized evaluation. In other cases, rely on established medical resources such as the Mayo Clinic, NHS, CDC, WHO, and NIH.

Use more caution with health influencers and commercial sites. Overall, combining professional medical guidance with reputable sources is a great way to fact-check health information from AI chatbots.

usatoday.com cannot provide a good user experience to your browser. To use this site and continue to benefit from our journalism and site features, please upgrade to the latest version of Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.

• Chrome: https://www.google.com/chrome/
• Edge: https://www.microsoft.com/edge/
• Firefox: https://www.firefox.com/
• Safari: Update to latest version through the App Store