Playing catch up

In Jason Leopold’s book “News Junkie” he reflects on his errors. Yet, he did have some large inaccuracies. But those errors were further magnified by small errors he made, such as misspellings of names. And those small errors were the result of working in a flurry, wanting to ensure that he would be the first one to break the story, using the wire service for which he worked to deliver the news.

Up until the recent past, wire services were the only print companies able to break news almost immediately. But with the development of more technological features in newsrooms, including text messaging and Web sites that make newsrooms seem to keep going and producing 24/7, all newspapers, in addition to the wires, have the ability to be the first to transmit the news to its audience. In fact, a Feb. 20, 2007 Editor and Publisher article “Fire the Wire,” by Mark A. Phillips, encouraged newspapers to get rid of their wires and hire locally with their budgets. So many Internet resources make the information available, it is old news by the time it hits the papers, he wrote.

These developments make the newspaper industry more competitive with other mediums, such as TV and radio, since newspapers can now make updates throughout the day and use the next edition to write more of a “second day” story rather than reporting the old news that most people already know. However, the push keeps everyone on a deadline when the article is needed 30 seconds ago from reporters who are pushing out the information. Reporters and editors are in a bind to get the information out and published before their competitors, and usual news practices to guarantee accuracy and ethics are often overlooked to get the story posted to the Web, pronto.

For instance, last week when Sharon Curry resigned from the fire district, Missourian staffers were in such as rush to get the information posted to the Web site it only went through the city editor and no copy editors or news editors before it was sent to be posted online. Had the Missourian not been in such a rush to beat the Tribune to the story, especially since the news happened on the Tribune’s news cycle, an accuracy check would have been performed and more layers of editing would have been done. While there was no backlash in this instance, there could be.

The emergence and popularity of the Web also cuts down on original reporting and makes plagiarism easier. Once again to use Leopold as an example – he copied and pasted paragraphs verbatim from another reporter’s work then failed to credit it. Not only did this constitute plagiarism, it was a disservice to him, in my opinion, as he didn’t dig for the information himself. Given the same assignment, no two people would come up with the same information and write the same story. Leopold hurt himself by not digging for the information himself and searching for ways to advance this information, in addition to looking for the answers to questions that came up for him but perhaps not the other reporter.

Wiki sites also impair the ethics and credibility of journalists. I, and several other journalists I believe, would never use something directly from a Wiki-type site other than as a lead. However, I think there are “journalists” out there who take this information as fact and don’t do their homework to ensure that the information is credible, accurate and correct. As our group discussed in class Monday, publishing this information, if wrong, could land the paper in a heap of trouble. This is another way reporters shy away from original, creative reporting.

From the sounds of this, it may appear that I’m totally against technology and think it does evil things to our line of work. But that’s not true. I do believe, however, the industry didn’t know how to respond to the technology and is now playing a game of catch up to figure out just how to deal with the advances in technology and how they relate to ethics. The Poynter Institute has noted this need, and in August 2006, assembled a team of online journalists to discuss issues surrounding their work. Participants also created a set of guidelines for doing ethical journalism on the Web.

In the article “Helter Skelter No More: An Evolving Guide for Online Editors,” written by Bob Steele that was posted to the Web site Poynter.org Jan. 31, these problems are outlined. “There are potholes related to blogging and there are land mines in the area of user-generated content. And there are significant issues related to the online intersection of news and advertising content,” Steele wrote. “Mix in some of the particular pressure points associated with publishing on the Web -- including linking, anonymous feedback and interactivity -- and you have stew that can turn from tasty to troubling."

The guidelines are on a Wiki site, located at http://poynter.editme.com/ethicsonline, which includes frequently asked questions that cover topics such as whether journalists should be allowed to keep blogs, the risks of “unedited journalism” and more. It highlights the good and the bad of online journalism. Publishers are also encouraged to come up with their own guidelines, mostly policies on different aspects of user-generated content.

My thoughts, overall, reflect those shared by the articles on the Poynter Web site. Online journalism and other technological advances can provide great opportunities and ways for print journalism to become stronger. The journalism world just needs to catch up with the ethics involved and make sure that everyone is on the same page. And reporters need to be reminded that the Web should supplement, not replace, their own original and investigative reporting.