Southern California media has done an excellent job, from what I’ve seen, of reporting the mass shooting in San Bernardino using liveblogs and social media.
This post is my early and admittedly incomplete assessment of coverage that is still unfolding, and I fell behind in following the story as I worked on the post, so it might reflect early developments better than later ones. I admit a bias on this topic: I visited the San Bernardino Sun and taught liveblogging, use of social media and other digital skills to my former colleagues at Digital First Media there and throughout the Los Angeles News Group, where journalists pitched in on today’s coverage. I’m proud of what I’ve seen of their performance. I watched their work more closely than anyone else’s and will unapologetically focus on it more.
What I’m going to do here is identify and show examples of best practices (and some not as good practices) in covering a breaking news story on Twitter and a liveblog. In a separate post tomorrow, I’ll curate a debate I joined with some other journalists about covering these unfolding stories. Update: Twitter embed codes don’t seem to be working in this post right now, but if you click on the date in the block quotes for tweets, that should take you to the tweet.
This blog post will continue to unfold, as the coverage does, after I initially post. I won’t mark any updates unless the correct the original post.
Report what you know
You can and should report important facts, with attribution, as you confirm them. Early in a story, the facts may be vague and impartial, the attribution no more than “reports.” But be as specific as possible within each tweet and in the flow of your coverage.
These early tweets from Beatriz Valenzuela of the Sun were necessarily vague, but accurate and important news for people in the area, who could still be in danger:
.@SanBernardinoPD confirm there is an active shooter situation hut no details have emerged.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
Agencies from neighboring cities have responded to the San Bernardino active shooter on Waterman and Park View. Several hurt.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
There are reports of 15 to 20 victims in this shooting, via @SBCityFire.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
She followed quickly with two more specific bits of information:
.@SBCityFire confirms there are 20-25 victims. Unclear on any deaths.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
According to @SBPDCervantes, there are one to three shooters. The scene is still active.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
She also identified the scene of the shooting:
The Inland Regional Center provides services for developmentally disable people.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
Eventually she got an updated, less vague account of the carnage (as accurate and official as was available at the time.
Initial numbers are 14 dead, 14 injured via @SBPDChief
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
These tweets by Sun reporters similarly helped the story unfold, focusing on facts, not speculation:
Press conference recap: Police went to Redlands home connected to Inland Regional shooting. They’re still trying to gain entry now.
— Ryan Hagen (@rmhagen) December 3, 2015
.@SBPDCervantes: Officers following up on shooting found what appeared to be suspects’ vehicle. Shots exchanged pic.twitter.com/DMJfyiWNGi
— Ryan Hagen (@rmhagen) December 3, 2015
SB native David Johnson says he heard the gunfire from Sizzler’s, a few blocks away. Says he could tell there were multiple shooters.
— Ryan Hagen (@rmhagen) December 2, 2015
.@SBMayorDavis is leaving scene to talk to families. “I have faith in our PD & our sheriff. In times like these we come together.”
— Ryan Hagen (@rmhagen) December 2, 2015
All of these tweets and more were accurate, sourced and adeptly and thoughtfully executed in the context of an unfolding, chaotic breaking story.
At multiple points in the unfolding story, it’s helpful to summarize what you know. I like this summary that was anchored at the top of the Sun’s liveblog:
The summary was updated, as it should be later (though the time stamp didn’t change; I think it was more than an hour later, and my computer converted the time to my time zone, so a little after noon in San Bernardino):
Say what you don’t know
Concentrate on reporting what you actually know, but occasionally acknowledge what you don’t know:
So, to be clear, the motive for this mass shooting is not known.
— Ryan Hagen (@rmhagen) December 3, 2015
Capture moments
Mass shootings are heart-breaking stories for journalists and emergency workers as well as the horrified survivors and the victims and their families. Reporters covering the story need to catch the awful and sometimes touching moments that convey the urgency, tragedy and the human response:
SWAT teams just drove past us at a high rate of speed.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
Brandon Hunt works for the Inland Regional Center which helps people with developmental disabilities.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
“This is a great agency. I don’t know why anyone would target it,” Hunt said.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
Hunt said co-workers described a chaotic and bloody scene. Some had to step over bodies as they left the building.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
Tell the story in photos and videos
.@SanBernardinoPD SWAT on scene pic.twitter.com/uFTfdBROOp
— Doug Saunders (@crimeshutterbug) December 2, 2015
The scene just outside the SAN Bernardino active shooter. All of these are law enforcement vehicles. pic.twitter.com/dseTo1z1MQ
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
This is still a fluid incident. Police are tasked with a 3 building search pic.twitter.com/BWlMZg86dm
— Doug Saunders (@crimeshutterbug) December 2, 2015
Tom Carrillo learned his daughter who works at the Inland Regional Center is safe. https://t.co/yBXXFtsm2s pic.twitter.com/hNm2SGc9vm
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
PHOTOS: Police Respond to Active Shooter in #SanBernardino https://t.co/lh3YFQBdHd #SanBernadinoShooting pic.twitter.com/Y8t0jTRQGv
— Rachel*Luna (@Rache1Luna) December 2, 2015
One officer called this an act of domestic terrorism pic.twitter.com/pmcvTYc94P
— Doug Saunders (@crimeshutterbug) December 2, 2015
.@SanBernardinoPD and other Law Enforcement agencies are evacuating people from the Inland Regional Center pic.twitter.com/kPU2dbWqV3
— Doug Saunders (@crimeshutterbug) December 2, 2015
SWAT teams just drove past us at a high rate of speed.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
Famy members are meeting up with loved ones at the Hernandez Center. Those evacuated will be bused there.
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
SWAT continues to patrol perimeter of the IRC pic.twitter.com/OZ52d2QUhi
— Doug Saunders (@crimeshutterbug) December 2, 2015
Provide useful information
I like that public agencies are doing a better job reporting useful information, especially public safety advice, in these crises. News organizations should retweet them or attribute information to them in original tweets:
City and county buildings have been shut down in the city. Via @sbcountysheriff
— Beatriz Valenzuela (@BeatrizVNews) December 2, 2015
ACTIVE SHOOTER:Area of Orange Show Rd/ Waterman Ave near Park Center, & surrounding area remains VERY ACTIVE. AVOID! pic.twitter.com/5vG0aYW6IL
— SB County Sheriff (@sbcountysheriff) December 2, 2015
.@SanBernardinoPD has confirmed 1to3 possible suspects.Multiple victims. #SBCSD &other agencies assisting. More info to come. #SanBernardino
— SB County Sheriff (@sbcountysheriff) December 2, 2015
Media reach out to possible ‘eyewitness’
I noted nearly six years ago the importance of finding and reaching out to eyewitnesses who tweet about seeing breaking news situations. Journalists are now using that technique extensively. An apparent eyewitness tweeted a message that intrigued multiple journalists:
I saw the shooter shooting people in San Bernardino. I’m scared for my life at the moment in hiding.
This section has been updated since I originally posted, based on new information.
I have not embedded the original tweet because I didn’t grab screenshots. But I probably would have decided not to use the screenshots, out of respect for her privacy if I had done enough investigation to determine she was legitimate. I have doubts that she was. But whether she was trying to fool the media, just having fun or seeking privacy after a traumatic event, she’s not interested in attention now.
After I grabbed embed codes for lots of tweets (just a few from her), I thought about grabbing screenshots, but then noticed that she had taken her account private. I still have the codes, so I have the dialogue, and I feel OK using that, but not her Twitter username. She’s had a rough day and received enough attention, if she’s legit. I understand why she would want her privacy. If she’s a fake, I don’t want to name her (even by a username that wasn’t an actual full name.
I do have embed codes from the journalists (and critics of journalists) who tweeted about this, but embedding the tweets would use the survivor’s username, and I don’t want to do that, so I will just quote her initial tweets, requests from journalists and responses from the public to the journalists’ requests (with a couple screen grabs of tweets that didn’t use her username (I didn’t use embeds because they would show parent tweets that used the username).
I recommend grabbing screenshots of tweets that might disappear. They are important and should be used in cases where you need to document bullying, politicians’ stupid statements or other tweets that might be removed. But I can’t see doing it in a situation where someone wants privacy after tweeting in the wake of such a terrible event. And I didn’t do it this time. You should grab shots of tweets that might be newsworthy. They can disappear from public view.
A second tweet from the purported survivor:
I’m not sure if I’m safe or not. I got a glimpse of the shooter. This is scary.
Two consecutive tweets from Brian Ries of Mashable called attention to the tweet and the responses.
Twitter user says she/he saw “shooter shooting people” in San Bernardino, California.
Also worth noting this person’s timeline is pretty troll-y…
In looking at the timeline for the day, I noticed how many journalists had sought to contact her for interviews, and the hostile responses the journalist received from people who thought it was rude to ask her for interviews. That’s what I thought Ries meant by “troll-y.” I was wrong, and I’ll get back to Ries’ suspicions about her. But first, here are some of the interactions with journalists:
please be safe. i am with the NYTIMES. can i call you?
Marie, hope you’re OK … awful. If you’re safe can you follow me back to talk to the NY Daily News? Thanks, Dan
John Fairfield, whose Twitter bio identifies him only as a Mets fan, responded to Good:
wow inappropriate
Other requests for interviews came from Nkechi Nneji of MSNBC, Natalia Nosovets of RT in Moscow and Melissa Fares of Reuters, who received this response from Fairfield:
awful inappropriate
A tweet from KCBS KCAL asked the survivor, “PLEASE STAY SAFE. CAN YOU CONTACT US AT CBS,” then gave a phone number. That plea drew this response (I use a screengrab because an embed would bring in the username of the survivor who wanted privacy:
That tweet and others from journalists did express concern for the woman’s safety. Henry Hanks of CNN tweeted to her: “I’m hoping you are okay and in a safe place. Tweeting from CNN. When you are safe, please follow and DM? Thanks.” That also drew an “inappropriate” rebuke from Fairfield.
Katy Conrad of CBS tweeted, “stay safe, where are you?” That drew a positive response (which I can’t now access), and Conrad replied:
good stay safe, if you can follow me back please do – ill msg you
I can’t find any indication Conrad got an interview. (Please send a link if you have seen an interview.)
Jenna Susko of NBC LA tweeted at the survivor: “Please stay safe. I’m with KNBC, would you be willing to talk to us?” That brought this response:
Another response to Susko, which included the survivor’s username, said: “What the fuck, anything for ratings right?”
Journalism is not easy, especially not in breaking stories. Some people who have survived such horrific events want to tell their stories, and journalists should be bold enough to ask and kind enough to tell the stories of those who are willing. And when people don’t want to tell their stories, we should respect their wishes and leave them alone. But one of my rules in journalism and life is: Never say no for anyone else.
Even if others reading your tweets don’t understand, you should ask for the interview. And, if her response is negative, you leave her alone.
And, whether you were to interview a witness or survivor or use a tweet or photo without an interview, you need to verify that the information, starting the claim that she witnessed it.
For instance, if you could verify that the woman was at the event, or worked at the regional center or the group that was meeting there, it would bolster her story. If she shot photographs of the incident, that would provide further verification. If she had location enabled in her tweets and they placed her at the scene, that would help.
Ries is doubtful a journalist could have verified any of that. What he meant by “troll-y” was that he thought she might be a troll, trying to get a journalist to fall for a prank.
In a direct-message exchange after this post was initially published, Ries, who can still see her timeline, said he was:
raising possibility he/she was more 4chan than an actual witness (we’ve seen 4chan-types in the past try and troll journos in breaking situations). Didn’t have location listed in SB, etc. I’m not doubting person was real witness just wanted to flag it wasn’t as clear cut as most Twitter witnesses I encounter.
Ries continued later in the exchange:
No evidence he/she lived in/near SB and I just feared all this local media was going to run some quote straight. she/he had tweeted about trolling airlines in the past, etc.
Going back in a person’s timeline is an important way of verifying legitimacy of crisis tweets. For instance, if in the morning she had tweeted a selfie of her dressed up for the holiday party where the murderers attacked, saying she was planning to go, that would be powerful verification. That tweet about trolling an airline, though, is a huge red flag.
Ries added:
Just was raising point for those who were going to reach out to be sure this person was legitimate, based on past tweets I wasn’t confident.
She must have let Ries follow her, because he can still see her tweets. He reports only one since the two about the attack: “Fuck.” That could mean she’s legit and overhwelmed by the media response. Or that could mean that she felt like someone (maybe Ries?) had found her out.
In a little Google research, I found only one Italian outlet that had quoted her tweet, but lots more media inquiries and hostile responses from the public. (I’ve detailed enough, won’t keep adding; definitely more of the same). And I found a few people earlier this year responding to her in ways that supported Ries’ suspicions that she might be a troll. In fact, someone called her that in a tweet.
So next time you see a great “eyewitness” tweet, check the possibility of a troll before you retweet or quote.
Planned Parenthood or ISIS speculation
Initial speculation about a possible ISIS connection came mostly from partisans and unidentified accounts, but some journalists joined the speculation. I would avoid that, but didn’t see any irresponsible reports actually suggesting a tie:
I really hope this shooting in #SanBernardino isn’t ISIS-related, but any way you slice it we’re dealing with more domestic terrorists.
— Matt Dolloff (@mattdolloff) December 2, 2015
More speculation (and some media reporting) focused on an apparently non-existent tie to Planned Parenthood, site of a domestic terrorist attack last week.
Before this becomes a thing, the #PlannedParenthood in San Bernardino told @CNBC they’re safe and well. https://t.co/seWnGp8Hg9
— Brian Ries (@moneyries) December 2, 2015
And because I know people will ask, the closest PP is just over a mile away from the active San Bernadino shooter pic.twitter.com/T1bQllO0vJ
— Aaron Gardner (@Aaron_RS) December 2, 2015
Contrary to some reports, Planned Parenthood in San Bernardino confirms to @CNBC they are fine, not the location of shooting
— Ben Berkowitz (@BerkowitzBT) December 2, 2015
Raw Story’s URL shows that it initially reported the shooting’s proximity to a Planned Parenthood clinic (“blocks away” isn’t close enough to be relevant until you know more). Updated headline doesn’t mention Planned Parenthood and the story I saw downplayed it:
The shooting happened several blocks away from a Planned Parenthood clinic, although employees there said the clinic was not a target.
That’s the kind of detail you shouldn’t report until relevance is established and confirmed.
Media coverage
Earlier case studies of Twitter use in breaking news
Denver Post staffers’ #theatershooting coverage demonstrates Twitter breaking news techniques
@statesman: A case study in using Twitter on breaking news
@statesman shines again in breaking news Twitter coverage
Twitter is an essential reporting tool
My tweeps help with tips and examples of Twitter’s value in covering breaking news
[…] Source: San Bernardino mass shooting provides strong examples of breaking news coverage […]
LikeLike
[…] Source : San Bernardino mass shooting provides strong examples of breaking news coverage […]
LikeLike
[…] « San Bernardino mass shooting provides strong examples of breaking news coverage […]
LikeLike
[…] elaborated in direct messages Wednesday night after my initial post, which focused more on the San Bernardino Sun’s breaking-news coverage, but reported his […]
LikeLike