The e-journalist

As news sources around the country work to keep up with the changing e-landscape, few organizations have had the time to revise what are now outdated ethical standards.

This can be seen in the contradictory stance journalism has taken on blogs and personal profiles. While journalists and journalism students around the country are encouraged or even required to be available electronically, the fine line between availability and too much information has wavered. For example, recently the Missourian’s own Tom Warhover sent out an e-mail to Missourian staff and students prohibiting political or organizational ties to be published on Facebook profiles, a popular social network for college students. The Facebook has been a growing student venue for almost two years now, but the conflict only just came to light (and thanks to a reporting student no less).

Blogs are even more nebulous, mostly because they encompass not only mainstream journalists but also “citizen journalism.” First things first, the publications have been able to deal with their own staffs, even if the decisions vary among organizations. Some journalists are prohibited from blogs altogether; others can have them only if they don’t identify their profession or discuss their work. Still more are completely open to the commentary found on reporters’ electronic counterparts.

As far as citizen journalism on blogs, there is less consensus on what should be counted as true journalism. During the group discussions in class, the main concern with bloggers as journalists was the absence of an editorial process and staff. Before publication in a paper, broadcast, textcast or posting online, a story must be vetted through an editorial process and checked over for factual and grammatical errors. While this process is not foolproof, it does prevent a lot of mistakes. There is no such editorial standard for bloggers who claim to be journalists.

Such blogs are not only in danger of writers’ biases and anonymity, but also of their psychology. “Flame First, Think Later: New Clues to E-mail Misbehavior,” a New York Times article by Daniel Goleman, argues that people are more likely to say offensive or rude things over the Internet than they are in person because they miss out on the emotional cues in a face-to-face conversation that typically cause empathy. This lack of inhibition can cause unnecessary misunderstanding and offense. In an e-mail to Missourian editors dated February 23, Pulitzer Prize winner Jacqi Banaszynski notes that the tendency for people to write offensive or rude material on the Internet may affect this journalism blogs as well: “Clearly this isn’t a strictly apples-to-apples comparison. But I do think it will be worth watching the “raw” coverage that is encouraged on online sites to see how much of it becomes the journalistic version of offensive and rude.”

On top of the conceptual questions behind traditional versus new journalism, there are shining examples like Jason Leopold. After an arguably too-long stint in mainstream journalism, the ethically flexible reporter now freelances for various independent journalism sites. In this particular case, the reporter has claimed to tighten his ethical standards. (Leopold, in-class message) However, that may be a slippery slope, and without the barrier and gatekeepers of mainstream journalism, credibility may be called into question.

Journalistic ethics should provide an anchor, a standard that holds journalism to its values. As journalists and the general population continue to be rocked by technological waves, they need not forget to lengthen the ethical chain.