Comments on: Newspapers and rules on Twitter

By: Is transparency the new objectivity? 2 visions of journos on social media » Nieman Journalism Lab

Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:58:58 +0000

[...] his or her credibility, either on Twitter or anywhere else. (Times editor Bill Keller effectively said the same thing during the fuss over the Times’ policy.) At the same time, however, a smart newspaper or [...]

By: Sinnvolle Social Media Guidelines | lab

Sinnvolle Social Media Guidelines | lab — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:33:50 +0000

[...] der Diskussion mit zahlreichen Links findet sich in diesem Blogposting von Mathew Ingram vom Nieman Journalism Lab der Harvard University. Unstreitig ist offenbar die Notwendigkeit von Social Media Guidelines. [...]

By: Ich bin jetzt bei Twitter… | lab

Ich bin jetzt bei Twitter… | lab — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:25:32 +0000

[...] auch der Artikel Newspapers and rules on Twitter: I have asked people to use common sense and respect the workplace and assume whatever they tweet [...]

By: All the News That’s Fit to Tweet « Safe Digression

All the News That’s Fit to Tweet « Safe Digression — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 01:08:13 +0000

[...] folks raise the question, though: do these policies inhibit the very functions that make social media [...]

By: Why don’t news orgs trust their journalists? « -30- | Adventures at the end of journalism.

Wed, 27 May 2009 14:21:50 +0000

[...] editors get that. One of them is John Robinson, editor of the News & Record in Greensboro. His philosophy is [...]

By: Ken Carpenter

Ken Carpenter — Fri, 15 May 2009 14:38:03 +0000

Without commenting on the various rules and policies, I will simply say this:

I feel more connected to @ShiraOvide and @GeoffreyFowler than I do “By Shira Ovide” and “By Geoffrey A. Fowler.”

It never hurts to turn a “reader” into an “insider,” or a “member,” though the reverse can be painful. When National Geographic started selling magazines on newsstands, I went from being a member to being a subscriber. Not so subtle a change.

By: Mathew Ingram

Mathew Ingram — Fri, 15 May 2009 13:08:17 +0000

@Seth — that’s the great thing about advice: free to give, free to receive, and no guarantees :-)

and Martin, I agree that the world of “scoops” — which is pretty much all journalists like to talk about — is a much smaller one than it ever was, and for many papers comprises roughly 0.000001 per cent of what they do.

@EP, I completely agree — social media inherently involves a blending of personal and professional, private and public, but that’s a very difficult thing for corporations of any kind (not just newspapers) to deal with.

By: EP

EP — Fri, 15 May 2009 12:47:11 +0000

I think an aspect that hasn’t been mentioned is how this reveals that our paradigms are still very early 20th century. I understand the need for guidelines when there are new platforms in which members of an organization are making public statements, but it seems to me that in this case they are very much based on assumptions about what is “public” and what is “personal” that are not entirely clear. Twitter and other “new” platforms require a new vocabulary based on a new consensual understanding of the new paradigms of social media.

By: Martin Langeveld

Martin Langeveld — Fri, 15 May 2009 12:30:13 +0000

One question in all this is: how important is the scoop, these days? Sure, Woodward wouldn’t have tweeted “Off to meet Deep Throat in the parking garage, details at 11,” but getting permission (from “senior editors”) in every instance before live-blogging a routine event being covered by others as well (as the WaPo policy requires), or completely prohibiting the use of Twitter for crowdsourcing (as the Bergen Record policy does, allowing only senior editors to tweet, as described in the E&P story), are ill-advised. Getting a story out first (often measured in seconds these days) is a parlor game that only matters within newsrooms. As it is, newsrooms are getting beaten by random Twitterers. Making the process of developing a story more open, more social, more transparent can only ad value to the reporting. Common sense should be the only rule. (Calling Matt Thompson.)

By: Seth Finkelstein

Seth Finkelstein — Fri, 15 May 2009 05:35:21 +0000

Sorry, Matt, this sort of recommendation is a sucker’s bet.

There’s too much of an incentive to claim credit for any positives, but take no responsibility for anyone who follows the advice but ends up badly hurt by it.

By: Andy Jacobson

Andy Jacobson — Fri, 15 May 2009 04:30:02 +0000

Based on NYTimes Twittering concerns I couldn’t imagine why I’d want to follow Bill Keller. So I took a look at his Tweets.

Yup, can’t imagine why I’d want to follow him.

By: Newspapers and rules about Twitter

Newspapers and rules about Twitter — Fri, 15 May 2009 03:12:23 +0000

[...] read the rest of this post at the Nieman Journalism Lab blog) [...]