You Believe Twitter that Johnny Depp Died? You Believe The Exclusive News of the World Report That Brad and Angelina Are Splitting? Who, What Can You Believe These Days?

Philip Stone January 26, 2010 Follow on Twitter

For those who can’t get enough gossip about Hollywood stars this past weekend was a bumper time – there was Twitter saying Johnny Depp had died in a French car crash (he didn’t) and Murdoch’s News of the World in The UK with a global exclusive that Brad and Angelina were splitting (nothing official but People says no, whereas “friends” hint all over the place it may be.) So, who and what can you believe these days?

still alive!!

Twitter has earned its “news” reputation for the first reports on earthquakes in China and Haiti and a multitude of other events. So when someone picked up on an old fake CNN site (from 2004) that said Johnny Depp  had died in a car crash then  Twitter broke into, well,  a complete Twitter with Johnny Depp and RIP Johnny Depp topics flooding with 150 word-and less messages from the grieving.

But after a while cooler heads started Twittering that all was not what it seemed.  From aeiouna@HeavilyBroken  came "A hoax that Johnny Depp died is circulating once again. (It came from a fake CNN page, in which the article was dated 2004)" and the fake web page was there for all to see.

That in turn brought warnings from other Twitterers that they need to check urls really carefully before spreading false stories. For instance the fake CNN page did not carry a cnn.com url but rather one from angelfire.com.

But the damage was done.  As wrote theecoolest1RT @anubhavsinha: “If you hear from somewhere that Johnny Depp died. Don't believe. It is a hoax going on for 4 hours internationally.” And then there was memisss’ “Tina and to the whole world Johnny Depp is NOT dead he is fine in LA, I had Nicholas call to the dad and all is GREAT!” (Others said he was alive in France).  Add to that a succinct comment from gillianhooperRT @KismetNDTV: “Someone started a fake online rumor that Johnny Depp had died in a car accident. I don't think that's funny at all.” And the final word, assuming it’s not a fake, from “shananaaa#RIP Johnny Depp. Relax world, my husband isn't dead. the supposed ‘CNN Article’ on it is fake. it's dated 2004. he's alive.”

Now if you were working for an established news organization and you saw or heard those first Twitters that Depp was dead, and knowing how in previous big events the Twitters have been right should you have picked them up immediately with a story saying, “The social web site Twitter says that movie star Johnny Depp died today in a car crash in France. A spokesman for the star could not be immediately reached”.  At least that is sourced to Twitter, you’ve tried to get confirmation elsewhere but no such luck. In other words you have done a cya (cover your ass). So, okay to go with that? Or do you wait until you when you can get your own handle on the story and thus your first story, perhaps some time after the original Twitters, might say, “A spokesman for film star Johnny Depp has denied reports on Twitter that the film star died in an car crash in France. ‘He’s fine,’ spokesman Robin Baum said.”

Two things come to mind: “Get it first, but get it right” and on such events get the information from two separate reliable sources before going with it. Those who followed those rules probably did okay.

And then there’s the reported split between Angelina Joli and Brad Pitt. Now you have to figure that there are probably more entertainment reporters and web sites based in Hollywood than anywhere else in the world and at the slightest rumor of anything the Web is alive with instant hot flashes. Yet it was some 6,000 miles away, in Murdoch’s Sunday tabloid The News of the World in London that the global exclusive broke that Angelina and Brad were not only breaking up, but they’ve agreed on custody, splitting their fortunes and that Brad had bought the house next door to be near the kids ..; the story seemingly had all the details.

But how could such a big Hollywood story be such an exclusive? It’s tough to believe that could happen with such a dynamo Hollywood pair.  So it wasn’t too surprising that media catch-up fell into two camps -- those who reported that  “The News of the World says …” while others like People.com, quoted sources saying, “everything is fine” and  quoting others saying the NOW report was “totally false”.

The British press, meanwhile, supported the News of the World story. The  Daily Mail, which is not in the Murdoch stable, said the couple were splitting and had some rather nasty quotes about how these days Angelina saw Brad and vice versa. Other media chimed in saying Brad was finding solace with ex-wife Jennifer Anniston, that Brad and Angelina haven’t slept together for a while … the list goes on and everybody is having a field day.

The truth is if the News of the World reporter got it right then he must have some really great source or sources that no one else in Hollywood has and for Hollywood that in itself is quite a story.

One has to think that the NOW editors checked and double checked their exclusive – after all that’s why we pay for printed news so we have the benefit of editors who try to ensure that what we read is right- -- rather than rely on the likes of Twitter where there are no editors. Time will tell if the NOW had it right at the time it printed the story, or was merely on the right track but was premature, or whether it was all wrong.

Meanwhile, whom do you trust?