The traditional news media are in turmoil.  The old line distribution platforms- print television and radio, are struggling in the business office and in the newsroom.  The people responsible for the bottom-line are desperately trying to recalibrate their business models and the folks in the newsroom are just as desperately trying to remain relevant.

Blame it, of course, on the internet.

The desperation in the business office is having an impact on how you are covered by the media, but we will leave that for another day.  Let’s focus on the struggle in the newsroom.

Print, television and radio are working hard to straddle two platforms; one foot is planted on the newsroom’s traditional form of distribution, the other on the internet.  The first foot is firmly planted and the newsrooms are confident of their footing.  Whatever you might think about their journalistic standards and how they apply them, the fact is that standards exist; reporters, editors and producers can articulate them and those standards are remarkably similar newsroom to newsroom.

That second foot is on shifting sand.  There are no firm, commonly accepted, widely applied principles, yet, about the practice of online journalism.  If they are honest about it, journalists working online will tell you they are experimenting.

As each new medium has appeared, standards and practices applied to that medium evolved as its practitioners explored and exploited the new possibilities it presented. So it is online.

What are the defining characteristics of online journalism?   

Immediacy, and not just the immediacy of TV and radio breaking news, the immediacy of anyone being able to publish and/or access information anytime, anywhere.  The traditional gatekeepers are no longer solely in control of what’s available and when it’s available.

And participation. Or the “conversation” as the online cognoscenti call it. You can post an online comment on just about any story on any mainstream media website and you don’t even have to sign your name. And there is a good chance, if you’re provocative enough, someone will respond to your comment.  And thus the conversation.  It is a breathtaking development in journalism rich with possibility. 

That’s all fine for the participants in the conversation.  But what if you’re the subject of the conversation?  It’s not polite…it’s not even civil.  It can feel like a free for all, everyone taking their shot.

Here are some of the issues newsrooms with an online presence are grappling with right now:

·        The tension between being the first to post news and being sure you’re accurate. That’s not a new issue for TV and radio, even newspaper, but the game is being played at warp speed now.

·        How do you apply the standards of accuracy, fairness and balance that you require for the content produced by your journalists to the online comments provided by the anonymous?

·        Should reporters who are covering a story be allowed to blog about that same story and express a personal perspective?

·        What links are appropriate to include in an online report?

·        Many papers and TV news operations let posters comment anonymously.  Or worse those who post can and do use other people’s identities in posting comments.  The first practice is just bad journalism.  The second practice of stealing one’s identity for the purposes of expression can be stopped by alerting the on-line editor of this transgression.

So, as journalists trial and error their way to standards for this new medium how should you respond?  Here are a couple of actionable ideas:

·        Pay attention.  Make sure you are monitoring the posted comments on any news story that concerns you.  In our experience with clients, it has become clear there are online readers who skip the journalist’s report and go straight to the posted comments because they believe they already know the facts of the story.  They just want the juicy comments.

·        It’s open season.  Take advantage.  You have to have advocates, not connected to your organization or your client, who will respond online to the unflattering comments and to the accusations.  Know who those advocates are.  Recruit them. Coach them. Have them ready to respond on your behalf.

·        Be relentless and unyielding in getting inaccurate reporting corrected on news organization websites.  It has always been important to let a reporter or editor know if they got something wrong, even if you weren’t asking for a correction or clarification.  Once upon a time, the inaccurate television story simply disappeared.  The inaccurate newspaper story consigned to some dusty shelf in a library or to microfilm.  Today, those inaccuracies have everlasting life on the news organization’s website where a quick archive search can quickly resurrect them.  Those inaccuracies will haunt you if you don’t exorcise them.  Our experience has been when you contact the on-line editor for news outlets, they are willing to make corrections to the on-line content.  After all, it is still the journalist’s job to get the story right.

Of course the other challenge is that many websites not connected with traditional media still present themselves as journalists.  These so-called “citizen journalists” don’t typically have editors.  Fact checking is virtually non-existent.  A discussion on the role of citizen journalists will also have to wait for another day.

The challenges faced by traditional journalists working online are also inevitably the challenges of the people on whom they report.  Online journalism is a new front in the battle to preserve reputations and there is no retreat.