Subject: Re: Ethics for reporters and editors From: seanb@pipeline.com (Sean Butterbaugh) Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 09:14:20 -0400

 
I'll delurk for this one. 
In terms of ethics relative to reporters and editors online, I think there
are several areas of concern, and most have to do with sources (The most
important aspect of journalism in my opinion.) 
 
a) Quoting.  Mention it is from an online source. Do the courtesy of
seeking permission to quote from the source, even if it is a private email,
rather than a post to a semi-public forum like this one. 
If you don't get permission, don't use it.  I think there may be a public
figure exception on this one, as Russ Siegelman and Philip DeWitt found out
the hard way. 
 
b)  Ed Van Ness brought up the idea of linking to a company if you discuss
that company.  I disagree for two reasons:  First, I am convinced by my
former boss, Gary Bolles, that linking directly to an outside source runs
the risk of carrying the user away from the text.  As a writer, I want the
reader to finish reading my stuff (dammit!).  Second, most web-savvy users
can Yahoo their way to a given website using a search engine.  I think an
excellent solution can be found in the academic paper model.  While
dyed-in-the-wool newspeople may shudder at the idea of interactive
footnoting, they should consider that we are not in the newspaper business
any longer.  Footnoting (call it a source list, or  as the Whole Earth
Review cadre called it:  "Access") is an excellent way to hyperlink to
material that may interest the reader without distracting users, or worse,
pulling attention from the immersive powers of text.  I disagree entirely
with Van Ness' idea of offering 'equal time' to contrasting points of view:
 It's a nice sentiment, but it's a jungle in here.  I can see how it would
be useful for activists who wanted to controvert advertisers, but I don't
see how that would entice publishers.  Links to contrapuntal arguments are
more of an editorial issue:  That is, there must be an editorial mission to
explore both sides of an issue. 
 
Case in point:  Take the Mumia case in Philly in which a black activist and
journalist is sentenced to death for the killing of a cop despite one of
the shoddiest trials in recent memory (save perhaps that of Bobby Seal).  A
web page illustrating the pro-Mumia arguments (currently being set up at
Voyager's website -www.voyagerco.com-) is one of the few voices that
promote Mumia's innocence.  Should it be hyperlinked to the case made by
the state?  Only where it points out the absurdity of the state's case, in
my opinion. 
 
c) Finally, on the Internet, no one knows if you're a dog, a reporter, or
Senator Exon.  If you are a reporter, you should announce it in your .sig
file.  If you are a reporter turned analyst (like me) then a grey area
enfolds you.  But being a reporter should be part of one's net.persona,
rather than a screen one hides behind to suss out the dish of the day. 
 
That's my dollar's worth.  I'll be interested in any responses. 
 
- -- 
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 
Sean Butterbaugh              Office 212.629.6564 
Assoc. Analyst                  Fax     212.529.3330 
Paul Kagan Associates 
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 

------------------------------

End of online-news-digest V1 #251
*********************************


From owner-online-news-digest@marketplace.com Thu Jul 20 19:31:20 1995
Received: from marketplace.com (root@marketplace.com [199.45.128.10]) by cnj.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA15736 ; for ; Thu, 20 Jul 1995 19:31:15 -0400