A Virtual Dilemma: Journalism & Social Media

During the J2J training in Vienna last month, Keishamaza Rukikaire-Kagwa, a journalist from Kenya who writes for PlusNews, brought up some important questions about the relationship we have with social media.  Thank you Keishamaza.  Let's start a dialogue here about our lives as tweeting, facebook-updating journalists.

How much should journalists reveal in social media networks like Twitter and Facebook? When does a post (or a tweet) cross the line? And who is paying attention?

I've dug up some industry guidelines, including those I abide by as an NPR producer, and I'll share those for your reference.  

First, though, it's worth considering the question at the heart of this issue:  What is the risk anyway?  

Don't ask the Twitter bird, who wants you to post everything, every minute of your waking life.  

I'll answer with one just one word: GOOGLE!  When it burns, it burns.

The bottom line is HIV/AIDS is a story with all sorts of tricky political dimensions. Author and former UNAIDS scientist Elizabeth Pisani told the J2J fellows in Vienna just how divisive the issue can be. Behind the data are political agendas.  And behind the political agendas are carefully planned media strategies.  

Tweets and posts, even in their most innocent incarnations, can jeopardize your news organization's credibility and even your ability to score certain interviews.  Even more subtly, your social media profile runs the risk of tainting your relationship with sources - or the information they choose to dish up.  

For example, imagine you were feeling skeptical about the AIDS 2010 theme: "Rights Here, Right Now." Maybe you thought it was merely rhetoric and not substantive (that was indeed a sentiment I heard quite often in Vienna).  Then you came up with a clever (and openly critical) facebook status message that you couldn't resist posting.  Or maybe you decided it was just too witty for FB real estate and decided to tweet your grievance instead.  

Fast forward a few months and you're working on a story about the connection between drug abuse and HIV.  You chase an interview with a local health leader.  It's a safe bet that person (or their press handler) may decide to google you.  He or she may stumble upon your diatribe about AIDS 2010.  Even though you may get the interview, your source now has a sense of your political persuasion and will more than likely tailor answers to what he or she perceives to be your interest.  

Even worse, a political organization can connect the dots after your story is published or broadcast, calling into question your journalistic standards.  Did you slant the piece to reflect your political hunch?  Maybe not. But it will be much harder to defend yourself if you left behind a trail of tweets.  

In less than 140 characters, you can permanently alter your ability to be objective - or at the very least, tatter your appearance as unbiased.  And chances are, your news organization will pay a price as well. 

My rule of thumb is to never post my opinions about anything political or global health related.  I may ask questions in my posts about certain ideas or even suggest certain lines of inquiry.  In any case, I keep it neutral (some may say boring), and when I do tweet - which is rare - it usually has to do with Lady Gaga's hair or something even more trite.  

It's also worth noting that the comment threads attached to stories can be a pitfall.  I don't know about you, but it is ridiculously hard for me NOT to respond sometimes.  I have some choice words for the haters, but I bite my proverbial tongue, because reactions are loaded with sometimes even unintentional political undertones. Obviously, this depends on whether you are signed on as yourself or using a pseudonym. In any case, be careful.  

Like most journalists, I try to maintain as much objectivity as I can.  I enjoy the challenge.  So I suppose I have accepted my social media fate.  Pop culture is usually fair game; politics are always off limits.  If you want to know where I stand, meet me for happy hour.  Off the record, of course.  

Clearly, I err on the side of cautious (some may call it paranoid).  

What about you?  Have you curtailed your tweet life to protect your image as a journalist?  Do you worry about your updates on Facebook? 

Here are the guidelines I live and work by as an NPR journalist and a blog about the issue from our Digital Media Managing Editor Mark Stencel.  Mark also points to this collection of perspectives on social media and journalism, compiled by Harvard's Nieman Reports.

Does your news organization have social media guidelines?  

Finally, on less dire note, social media platforms can also serve as powerful reporting tools. Have you used Facebook or Twitter to find interview subjects?  If so, how did you do it?  

Editor's note: We just switched blogging platforms. Here are comments previously posted for this entry:

Comments

I have definitely started censoring my Tweets and Facebook activity, especially after the CNN incident. I have limited my Twitter activity to tweeting and retweeting news, particularly HIV-related news, and my Facebook page must be wondering where my spirit went because I'm a lot less opinionated about what I write on there now.

It's dull, but it's probably wiser and safer to do this.

Posted by: Keishamaza | August 11, 2010 at 07:41 AM

Keishamaza - good point re: CNN.

The network fired Octavia Nasr, Senior Middle East News Editor, after she tweeted about the death of the Shiite Cleric Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah.

In her tweet she said he was, “one of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.”

Here's a link to a folo up story: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39498.html

Did CNN go too far?

Posted by: Douglas | August 11, 2010 at 10:23 AM

All good points, Douglas. I never post personal opinions on anything. I think it's safer for reporters to tweet links to news reports they've done, or links to other important stories.

Posted by: Kenny Goldberg | August 11, 2010 at 12:01 PM

This is an interesting topic; I say that because I was a huge skeptic of social media a year ago. Fast forward and here I am- visibly present on Twitter and Facebook! I was skeptical largely due to many of the issues you raised about how I would be perceived based on the opinions shared, but I’ve quit worrying. I used social media both as an advocacy tool and as an outlet; sometimes it is all you have.

Facebook offers me a unique opportunity to canvas my ideas and opinions in addition to sharing them. Rarely do I consider the repercussion of my posts because anything I say publicly can be identified with my writing, but more importantly, with me. I am writer but I am also a stakeholder and this explains why I use social media; my ideas, my opinions and my concerns will get out there.

Fear has crippled so many people in my country (Guyana), but more importantly, freedom of speech is being eroded. I look at Facebook and Twitter and realize that without them many of us would be deprived of an opportunity to say how we really feel about some issues outside of the stories people in my field write about. Within the last year, Facebook has been the ‘go to place’ to get a sense of what Guyanese are thinking and how they feel about a particular issue. It has been really interesting.

I remember having the amazing opportunity to meet a former American journalist, Marvin Kalb, who told me and I will never forget this that “journalism is also activism”. The activism he spoke of is the one I believe in; no placards and partial use of the pen, but rather careful and important advocacy in your writing on issues which otherwise would be considered minor new items. Today, Facebook is part of my journalism activism and I am only

now getting started.

Posted by: iana | August 11, 2010 at 03:14 PM

Thanks for the article, Douglas.

In my country there are some cases related to tweet and facebook thing that leads some people to courts trial, and I should learn from that. Posting about Lady Gaga thing will be so much fun.

My company hasn't rules of social media thingy just yet, but I'm sure it will. Some other company event use tweet as a mandatory items their employer should have without telling them the do's and don'ts.

Posted by: Dianpurnomo | August 11, 2010 at 11:29 PM

The irony is that the more avenues we have for free speech, the more we have to censor ourselves.

Posted by: Keishamaza | August 12, 2010 at 08:21 AM