Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Media change deniers: Why debates around news need a better evidence base — and how we can get one
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
May 13, 2009, 11:39 p.m.

WSJ’s Twitter rules: too restrictive

Staffers at the Wall Street Journal recently received an updated corporate conduct policy, including sections on how to behave when using social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. The response to the new rules of engagement, however, has been far from positive so far, with Jeff Jarvis saying the Journal was guilty of “missing the point.” Jarvis says the new rules don’t allow reporters to “make their reporting collaborative,” and that one of the benefits of such social networks is that they “provide the opportunity for reporters and editors to come out from behind the institutional voice of the paper … and to become human.”

The need to have a conduct policy is a reality for major newspapers, and it makes sense to deal with new areas such as Twitter and Facebook — the paper I work for is developing a similar policy. But I have to agree with Jeff about the Journal’s restrictions on reporter behaviour. Obviously, a newspaper doesn’t want to give away the store and tell everyone what stories it is working on, or tip its hand in a variety of other ways, and probably doesn’t want to go into detail about how certain stories emerged (especially if it was a fortuitous accident). But Jarvis is right that talking about stories that are under way can also have tremendous benefits.

The biggest point, however, is that Twitter is inherently personal — that’s why people use it, and why they enjoy it and become loyal to those they follow. The idea that you can maintain a strict division between the personal and professional just doesn’t jibe with the way social networks (or human beings) operate. Naturally, a newspaper like the Journal doesn’t want its reporters discussing every detail of their personal lives on Twitter, and no one would argue with that. A little taste of the personal can have a tremendous impact, however, and can build loyalty with readers. Media outlets like the Journal ignore that at their peril. Steve Buttry of Gazette Communications in Iowa has a good take on the new rules as well.

POSTED     May 13, 2009, 11:39 p.m.
SHARE THIS STORY
   
Show comments  
Show tags
 
Join the 45,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Media change deniers: Why debates around news need a better evidence base — and how we can get one
“If we let media change deniers drive the conversation, the result will be dumber journalism, less-informed public debate, and ineffective and counterproductive public policy. Even if what they say sometimes ‘feels right.'”
Who’s creating the top Facebook videos? “Not people you’ve necessarily heard of”
Babies and puppies continue to rule the day, and only 2% of the most engaged Facebook videos were posted by traditional publishers.
Vox’s new Netflix series is really good, but it doesn’t get us any closer to figuring out what news on streaming platforms looks like
The real revolution in video news will be when someone, someday, figures out a way to make timely, high-quality, democratically useful news work natively on a streaming platform.