Late last week, a headline from our local “Patch” news service caught my attention – Police: Group of Teens Cause $1,500 in Damage at General’s Ridge Golf Course. I opened the story expecting to find names and ages attached to the accusation, but there were none. In fact, other than a description that the [...]]]>

Late last week, a headline from our local “Patch” news service caught my attention – Police: Group of Teens Cause $1,500 in Damage at General’s Ridge Golf Course. I opened the story expecting to find names and ages attached to the accusation, but there were none. In fact, other than a description that the individuals were shirtless and had a dog with them, there were no other details that had been confirmed. The perpetrators haven’t yet been identified or caught. So how do we know they are teenagers? They could be 20 years old – or 40. For that matter, how do we even know the dog was a German Shepherd? Yet these details were reported as fact. Is there any danger in assigning an age label to crime suspects when they haven’t yet been caught, let alone accused? Would it have been just as acceptable to report their race or religion?

It’s been quite a few years since I matriculated from Penn State with a journalism degree, but I still remember the endless days of sitting in class picking apart real headlines and leads for any sign of bias. Not only did we look at our own work, we examined the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. Sometimes it seemed impossible to find ethics issues in products from such venerated media outlets, but we dug until we did. Now I don’t have to look far at all for instances of ethical breaches and bias, and I often feel very alone in my need to pay attention to such details. Does the rest of the world just accept this new era of “anything goes” reporting?

A recent after-work viewing of Page One: Inside The New York Times cemented the nagging feeling that it’s not  just newspapers that are disappearing, it’s the care and commitment to accurate, factual reporting that they represent. From All the President’s Men to The Paper, our culture has tried to emphasize the importance of getting it right, even at the expense of getting it second. Now those films, and that sentiment, seem naive and nostalgic. I mean, we’re all reporters, right? I can post whatever I want on Facebook or Twitter, and it can be seen around the world in a matter of minutes. Of course, if we could count on each other for accurate, first-person accounts, it would mean that Natalie Portman, George Clooney and even William Hung are all dead – because Twitter said so.

This month, the practice of journalism was further rocked by allegations that NewsCorps-owned outlets invaded the voicemail accounts of several British citizens, including a young murder victim and relatives of fallen soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is plenty of outrage around the situation, but will it finally wake up the public enough to demand a return to the ethics and standards that were once a hallmark of reporting?

The irony is not lost on me that I am writing this piece as a public relations professional rather than a currently working journalist. Like so many of my wide-eyed fellow journalism graduates, my picture of traveling the world to uncover scandal and save lives was far from the reality of fast-food wages and hours spent rewriting stories on a local fight over back lit awnings. However, I’ve never set aside those basic journalism ethics in my PR work. As a communicator for social change, I often have an opportunity to pass along critical information that can help reporters investigate their own stories. I know it’s in my and my clients’ best interests for those journalists to be fair, accurate and unbiased – even if the results are not as flattering as I would like. I know that once the line is breached – whether or not it’s on behalf of my cause – it’s hard to cross back to the other side.

Join our Page One Blog Party

I recently came across this article about the ethics of ghostwriting for a client on Twitter (UPDATE: the previous link is no longer active – you can view the Google cache of the article here). The client is an executive who wanted several staff members to tweet from his personal Twitter account during a [...]]]>

I recently came across this article about the ethics of ghostwriting for a client on Twitter (UPDATE: the previous link is no longer active – you can view the Google cache of the article here). The client is an executive who wanted several staff members to tweet from his personal Twitter account during a conference because he was concerned that he would be unable to keep up with all of the tweets that should be sent out throughout the day.  The executive instructed his staff to provide disclaimers noting that some of the tweets were not his own; they did so, providing a reminder once in every ten updates.  From the article:

“The executive wants his tweet stream to reflect his activity at the show, and to highlight other happenings at the conference, as well. He’s concerned that he won’t be able to support this many obligations.”

While I fully understand the importance of a consistent stream of tweets with information that is important and relevant to followers, it may be confusing to have multiple people tweeting from one individual’s personal Twitter account.  A strong alternative solution would be to create a separate Twitter account specifically for the conference or for the issue. An account that is not associated with one person can be updated by a team because the account’s “followers” do not expect to see the thoughts and opinions of one person.

“For the record, there was no pushback from the executive’s followers. Anyone who took the time to react to our approach seemed to appreciate the fact that, for a short time, his tweet stream became a mix of on-the-floor reporting by the exec, supplemented by dispatches from a third-party response team in marketing.”

The disclaimer helps – but if I am following an individual on Twitter that is an executive of a company, I expect to see that executive’s thoughts and not the thoughts of their PR team. This raises the question – if a person doesn’t have time to tweet, is it misleading for that individual to have a team updating their personal Twitter account, even if they are telling that team what to tweet?

An executive that is telling their team what to update on their behalf still represents the thoughts of that executive.  In this instance, the argument can be made that the person who is physically typing and sending the tweet is unimportant because their followers are still seeing the thoughts of the person associated with the account. It would be naïve to think that every personal account on Twitter is updated solely by that individual – but is it the hope of all their followers that it is that individual typing and sending the tweets?  And with reporters and media outlets paying greater attention to Twitter, what are the ethical concerns regarding updates attributed to individuals that come from a team of professional communicators?

I know, not everyone is Bill Gates. Very few people on the planet can gain 100,000 followers on Twitter eight hours after launching their Twitter profile.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndevil/ / CC BY 2.0

But perhaps we should start thinking like Bill.

Using his newly formed Twitter community, Gates recently launched his newest endeavor, The Gates Notes, where he [...]]]>

I know, not everyone is Bill Gates. Very few people on the planet can gain 100,000 followers on Twitter eight hours after launching their Twitter profile.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndevil/ / CC BY 2.0

But perhaps we should start thinking like Bill.

Using his newly formed Twitter community, Gates recently launched his newest endeavor, The Gates Notes, where he will personally document his thoughts, travels and work with his nonprofit organization, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

It’s not uncommon for CEOs and executive directors of NGOs to share updates and information with supporters through blogging and/or e-newsletter columns. But Gates’s new Web site takes it a step further and other nonprofit leaders should take note.

This interactive Web site gives visitors an inside look at global issues from Gates’s personal perspective. Even his first post on Gates Notes feels like a diary entry:

It often feels like I’m back in school, as I spend a lot of my time learning about issues I’m passionate about. I’m fortunate because the people I’m working with and learning from are true experts in their fields. I take a lot of notes, , and often share them and my own thoughts on the subject with others through email, so I can learn from them and expand the conversation.

I thought it would be interesting to share these conversations more widely with a Website, in the hope of getting more people thinking and learning about the issues I think are interesting and important.

With the thousands of charitable and advocacy organizations competing for the public’s attention, Gates Notes shows how a personal touch can set an organization apart and build a larger community. Whether through blogs, e-newsletters,  social networking profiles or more traditional communication channels, readers will appreciate and respond to candor, honesty and passion for a cause when shared through a real human voice. Think of it as persuasive storytelling 2.0, using technology to share personal testimonies and insights.

Are there limits? Absolutely. Often, organizational leaders do not have the time and/or expertise to communicate via social media and rely on their communication staff to do it on their behalf. This can pose quite an ethical dilemma. In such a personal medium, can people  share messages through social media pretending to be (or on behalf of) someone else? Are we misleading readers? As a profession, we are still trying to figure it out. PR pro Todd Defren’s blog PR-Squared is exploring those very ethical issues.

The bottom line is that whenever possible, leaders should write their own posts for authenticity and transparency. If this is not an option for an organization, then leaders and communicators should consider creating social media presences under their organization’s name or profile, instead of tying it to a specific individual. Then, anyone affiliated with the organization can communicate on their behalf, eliminating ethical challenges.

Honesty and transparency when communicating online are the best policy. And if we take a tip from Bill, the personal touch can be a winning strategy.