As I blogged last week, I was involved in a discussion of new guiding principles for journalism.
I’m glad that Poynter and craigconnects are leading this effort. I think that we need some new guiding principles to cover the challenges of digital journalism and recent ethical controversies. I also think Poynter’s Guiding Principles for the Journalist are a good place to start (I blogged separately about those principles).
I would encourage retaining two of the primary section headings of the current guiding principles: “Seek Truth and Report It As Fully As Possible” and “Minimize Harm.” I would revise the other one, “Act Independently,” to read: Act Transparently and Independently.
I like Craig Silverman’s blog post, Journalism ethics are rooted in humanity, not technology. The principles he lists at the end there might be better headings than I propose, but I think most or all of my suggestions would fit under those headings.
I like the brevity of the points in the Guiding Principles. In some of my proposals here, I try to achieve similar brevity. At other times, I elaborate more than the principles probably should. While I hope our discussion of these issues is extensive (and some of my extended comments are part of that discussion), we want to keep the principles themselves clear and simple wherever possible.
In a preamble to the three main sections, I propose saying something like this:
Journalism ethics are a result of thoughtful decisions, rather than arbitrary rules. When time permits, journalists facing difficult choices should discuss the situation, relevant ethical principles, alternatives and potential impact with editors and colleagues before deciding. Freelance journalists and solo entrepreneurs should develop networks of colleagues with whom they discuss ethical decisions.
Explain your ethical decisions in a blog, social media or other forum. A decision you can’t explain is a decision you should reconsider.
My other suggestions (which I propose as additions to the current points in the Guiding Principles):
Be transparent and independent
Disclose any personal interests, relationships, affiliations or experiences that might influence your journalism — or give the appearance of influence — on a particular story or in your general performance. Some good ways to handle this are with extensive general-purpose disclosure pages linked from a journalist’s byline and editor’s notes with specific stories.
Acknowledge your sources (unless you had a valid reason to grant confidentiality). Ideal attribution includes name of the journalist, name of the publication or organization and a link if you are citing material that is available online. Even when a journalist does original reporting to confirm information originally reported by others, the journalist should acknowledge the earlier reporting.
Journalists should identify sources even if the source doesn’t expect attribution, as in a press release. Our principle of transparency and attribution is an obligation to our readers and viewers, not to sources.
Journalists should be careful and diligent in acknowledging sources of information in their notes and published content. Carelessness or sloppiness do not excuse plagiarism.
Journalists and news organizations should acknowledge and correct errors. Where journalists or news organizations can identify others who have repeated an error (such as retweeting it), they should note the correction directly to those who republished the error.
Journalists should not disguise or withhold their identities in any form of communication. A rare exception would be in restaurant reviews or another form of consumer reporting where identification as a journalist would inhibit the ability to report on the experience of members of the general public.
Journalists who maintain separate personal and professional social media accounts should behave ethically in their personal accounts and should presume some members of the public might see content they post privately.
Journalists should consider whether transparency about opinions will build credibility better than a stance of neutrality. Opinions are acceptable in some journalism contexts and not in others. Journalists should discuss with their editors (or with staff they supervise) to clarify whether opinion is acceptable in a particular position.
As entrepreneurial journalists and innovative organizations seek new business models for news, journalists should discuss ways to protect the integrity of editorial content and should be transparent about revenue streams and relationships with revenue sources. The ethical need to remain free of advertiser influence should not hinder journalists from working to develop healthy business models to support and sustain independent journalism.
As organizations and individuals involved in other primary pursuits undertake journalism ventures in their areas of interest, they should disclose in detail their potential conflicts, including the source of their funding, and should seek to provide structural separation between the journalism and the funding.
While links and flexibility of space and time make disclosures easy on digital platforms, journalists and news organizations should make ethics disclosures in print and broadcast content as well.
Additions to “Seek the truth”
Journalists should use accuracy checklists to prevent errors and improve verification.
Journalists should strive to go beyond “he-said-she-said” stories that present conflicting accounts of an event or issue. The journalist’s job is to learn and report the truth in these cases.
Journalists, not sources, are responsible for the accuracy of their content. You should make every effort to confirm facts you report, not merely to attribute them.
“Who?” is an essential question for journalists to answer. Journalists should withhold names of their sources only in extreme cases for valid reasons. Protecting powerful people from accountability for their words is almost never a valid reason. Journalists granting confidentiality should seek to verify information from sources they will not name and should not publish opinions from people who are not speaking on the record. Journalists should closely and skeptically examine the motives of sources asking to speak confidentially. Even if the motives are legitimate, journalists should keep in mind that confidentiality prevents accountability.
Addition to “Minimize Harm”
If your organization has a policy not to identify survivors of sexual abuse, you should make exceptions for survivors who wish to speak on the record. (Incredibly, I once worked for a newsroom that made no exceptions, a hurtful position that treated sexual assault survivors as though they had some cause for shame.)
Journalists and news organizations should not remove content from digital archives except in extreme cases, such as for legal reasons. When people who were acquitted of criminal charges (or convicted many years ago) request removal of embarrassing but true stories, a better solution is to code those stories so they will not show to external search engines. Archives should be updated to reflect the outcomes of criminal cases or other charges of wrongdoing.
What do you suggest?
What have I overlooked here? How would you change my proposals? Which of my suggestions would you toss out?
Well done! This covers a multitude. I also think it is important to specifically address issues on Facebook and Twitter rather than the overall ethics language. I would also like to see all news orgs make their social media policy public.
LikeLike
I don’t see the need for specifically addressing issues on Facebook or Twitter. Lots of points apply here, but I think we want general principles rather that rules for specific tools. What do you think the principles should say specifically about Facebook or Twitter?
LikeLike
[…] As I blogged last week, I was involved in a discussion of new guiding principles for journalism. […]
LikeLike
I appreciate that you kept it platform agnostic. Tools will come and go. I Think these are solid principles.
But I think the exploration needs to go farther into the new ethical responsibilities of the journalist and news organization in an age where the community has the means to self-publish.
For example, our audience of readers are now a community of sharers and reporters in their own right, so telling the truth is still important, but so is having a media literate audience who can tell your truth from easily created propaganda.
Plus, it is important to help your audience seek truth and access tools to inform their communities. So many of our audience members are disenfranchised and we have the responsibility to help them add their voices to the larger conversation.
Before, our responsibilities were towards a better product and a more informed community. Now, in addition, our responsibilities are toward a healthier media ecosystem and a more capable community.
Before, we were the beneficiaries of gatekeepers. Now that the walls are down we must be leaders and teachers and designers of new information ecosystems. We must be accessible and welcoming, thoughtful and engaging.
And that ties into the larger point that we must act—more human.
LikeLike
[…] Bob’s guiding principles, which have considerable overlap with the SPJ Code. I blogged some suggestions for what the new principles should say. But I also want to salute Bob for how well these principles have served […]
LikeLike
Steve, I’ve been following the symposium and subsequent discussion, and I wanted to offer a few thoughts.
– I’ve used the guiding principles and the SPJ code a lot with journalism students, and I agree that simplicity in stating the broad principles is important (whether the list ends up being this one, Craig Silverman’s or another one). Keeping them brief makes them easier to remember and weigh against each other. As Bob Steele pointed out in your other post, the principles are often in tension with each other.
– I agree that transparency is important to add, but I wonder if it makes more sense to group it with “seek truth” or address it as a subpoint under that than to group it with “act independently.” A big part of transparency is being truthful about journalism processes and what we know and do not know.
– I think it would be useful to add a subpoint under “seek truth” addressing one aspect of “process journalism”: when it is ethically appropriate to acknowledge unverified information, particularly stuff that others – members of the public or journalists – are already sharing on social media. This is very preliminary wording, but I’m thinking of something like: “Journalists should welcome public contributions coming through social media or other means as they develop stories. But they should also exercise care in acknowledging unverified reports, whatever the source. They should consider the possible harm that might result if the information proves false and should seek to verify it as soon as possible and report on it accordingly through the same channels.” I’m trying to acknowledge the place of journalists in the larger information ecosystems that Ben’s post mentioned while also suggesting guidance for journalists in their work.
I hope this is helpful.
LikeLike
Excellent points, David. I paired transparency with independence because of the tension involved there: We should be transparent about our inability to be fully independent. But I also considered whether transparency should be a separate principle entirely. And I wouldn’t quarrel with its inclusion in other sections. But I think the most urgent need is to make transparency an important guiding principle of journalism.
LikeLike
Thanks, Steve. I agree that adding transparency is crucial, however it’s done.
LikeLike
[…] on the third page now). New posts about Bob Steele’s Guiding Principles for the Journalist, my suggestions for updating the Guiding Principles and the #PoynterEthics discussion about updating them (plus some archived ethics post) generated […]
LikeLike
I found your article very informative on your suggestions for improving digital journalism. While unrelated, seo writing also raises concerns of plagiarism. This can be eliminated by content writing specialists by being updated about search engine optimization strategies to improve search engine rankings of websites. It is up to the companies to invest in quality, affordable content writing services to avoid getting into copyright issues for rewriting or rephrasing content.
LikeLike
I almost deleted this comment as spam. Because it raise a relevant topic, I approved it but deleted the commercial link. The best way to avoid plagiarism is to do original work, citing and linking to sources. I don’t know that hiring vendors to provide content is a better way to ensure ethical content than hiring staff journalists.
LikeLike
[…] journalist. Journalism ethics remain a regular topic here. I blogged about Bob after sharing my suggestions for new guiding principles, which I posted after participating in (and blogging about) a Poynter Institute forum to discuss […]
LikeLike
[…] Suggestions for new guiding principles for the journalist […]
LikeLike
[…] called on SPJ in 2010 to update its Code of Ethics. I also recommended some changes in Poynter’s Guiding Principles for the Journalist, which are being […]
LikeLike
[…] Suggestions for new guiding principles for the journalist […]
LikeLike
[…] I should also express appreciation here for the new book, The New Ethics of Journalism: Principles for the 21st Century, by Kelly McBride and Tom Rosenstiel. I intend to read and review the book, but haven’t had time yet. I was involved last fall when Kelly and Tom led a discussion on developing new guiding principles for journalism ethics, and I made some suggestions for Poynter’s new guiding principles. […]
LikeLike
[…] give excellent advice on being transparent about connections that may influence our content. In my October suggestions for the Guiding Principles, I merged independence and transparency into one section, so I’m pleased with this change. […]
LikeLike
[…] Suggestions for new guiding principles for the journalist […]
LikeLike
[…] comments: I did not suggest a change in the core principle for this section in 2010, but in 2012 I suggested that Poynter rename the similar section in its Guiding Principles for the Journalist ̶….” Poynter went a step further in its new Guiding Principles, replacing independence with […]
LikeLike
[…] in 2012 from a Poynter event to discuss updating the Guiding Principles, then blogged again with suggestions for the new principles and in 2013 with praise and criticism for the completed guidelines. Among other changes, the […]
LikeLike
[…] already blogged twice about the Times report, and I’ve blogged multiple times about the importance of transparency. So I won’t belabor the point here. But […]
LikeLike
[…] not addressing linking in Poynter’s new Guiding Principles for the Journalist (I had encouraged that in 2012). I made the same points repeatedly as SPJ updated its new Code of […]
LikeLike