Friday, February 23, 2007

"A Bloggers' Code of Ethics"

Lately at my apartment, the internet seems to go out about once a week for a period of a couple days. It’s an extremely frustration situation when I can’t check my e-mail, browse my favorite Web sites and use the internet for homework, of course. We all have our routines every day including checking our favorite Web sites, however, I don’t think we really understand how much we rely on the internet until we can’t use it. This situation, as incredibly irritating it has been for me, has actually been an eye-opener because it’s made me realize how much I really do rely on the internet and technology.

The internet is just like any other tool we have available to us. You can look up information for a story in a book, but why waste the time finding the book when you could have looked it up on the internet before you got out the door? While the internet makes us more efficient and information much more readily available, it has its drawbacks, of course. Sometimes people are in such a hurry to get the information quickly or break a story, that they overlook the fact that the information might not be credible. This includes journalists even though some wouldn’t like to admit it. Clearly, technology can be a curse to journalists as we saw with Jason Leopold and his book, News Junkie. Leopold was so focused on being the first to break a story that he put the ethics of journalism aside. While many are so focused on whether journalists are following the code of ethics related to technology, they seem to forget the idea that an ethical journalist is going to be ethical with or without the internet. The code of ethics for a medium such as broadcast or print, isn’t really different than the online community.

In the online community, bloggers have an ethical obligation to their readers just as much as a newspaper does. To be clear, whether the bloggers are journalists or not, not all are going to feel they have an ethical obligation to their readers, only the responsible ones. To reporters and bloggers alike, the foundation of credibility is integrity. Just like a reporter, a blogger who fails to report the truth is going to lose credibility and their readership. Responsible bloggers should recognize that anyone has the capability to read what they write and therefore they should understand that they have certain ethical obligations to their readers. But just how strict should these ethical obligations be? Like I said before, a bloggers’ code of ethics shouldn’t be much different than a trained reporter.

Founded in 2000, cyberjournalist.net is edited and published by Jonathan Dube, an award-winning online and print journalist. The Web site identifies itself as “a news and resource site that focuses on how the Internet, convergence and new technologies are changing the media.” In order to create a code of ethics for the blog world, Dube modified the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. Titled a “Bloggers’ Code of Ethics”, it was created to give guidelines to bloggers so that they can practice ethical publishing. The first main idea in the code is to be honest and fair. This includes being transparent to your readers about sources, not publishing questionable information and distinguishing between fact and commentary. So far, sounds like a code that reporters and newspapers practice. The next main point is to minimize harm. This includes being sensitive to those affected by tragedy or grief and even references to laws about privacy when it comes to public vs. private figures. Again, these guidelines are quite similar to ones journalists practice as well. The final point of the Bloggers’ Code is to be accountable. Admitting and correcting mistakes, disclosing conflicts of interest and exposing the unethical practices of other bloggers are all parts of that idea. Yes, technology can be a shortcut for journalists which can harm their ability to be ethical. But, it doesn’t have to be. As long as journalists remember the principles in which ethical journalism (blog or not) is practiced, I think we will be just fine.

No comments: