In a March 30th comment on her Facebook page, former Spokesman-Review reporter Taryn Thompson offers some experienced and interesting insight about local news media including anonymous blog comments in news stories.
Here is a reprint of her comment used with her permission.
Do you believe in principle that anonymous blog comments should or should not be included in news stories? If you do, what do you believe they add?
Would you still comment on OpenCdA if you had to attach your true name to your comment? Why?
Taryn’s comment is spot on. She is a true professional and unfortunately her career is one that is becoming lost and unfortunately, it is becoming replaced with sensational blogging and comments by any “anonymous”. Anyone can ‘publish’ these days and it has degraded credible investigative reporting.
I read an interesting article/blurb about dying professions and of course the ” Journalism Reporter” was mentioned. The alternative was:
” Try jumping on the other end of the press release, and pick up a gig in public relations. As a PR specialist, you’d still be in media and communications, but you’d be in much higher demand and earn more than your journalistic counterparts; salaries range from $39,560 to $72,840.
If you’re set on staying in journalism, consider a switch to broadcast news analyst. You can work on-air as a newscaster or behind the scenes as a news director. Broadcast news analysts are paid better than reporters and are expected to add 10.2% more positions this decade.”
Taryn has all of the skills to go there.
The only reason one might keep their comments anonymous is fear of retaliation. I am not a reporter, I don’t like the limelight, but I stand behind my words, thus, if required I would blog/comment behind my real name. I might not comment or blog as much because … well, it’s not my job. 🙂
Comment by Stebbijo — April 5, 2013 @ 7:17 pm
Is the quality of timely, accurate, complete news reporting decreasing because it is unprofitable to deliver it or because the audience really doesn’t care about timely, accurate, and complete news reporting any longer?
Comment by Bill — April 5, 2013 @ 7:38 pm
Bill, it is my belief that the lack of quality of timely, accurate, complete news reporting at most levels in all media is a result of the acceptance of self mediocrity on the part of the individuals in the entire business, from reporter, to editor/publisher. Its an attitude of doing just enough to get a paycheck(ie;work ethic).
Comment by Ancientemplar — April 6, 2013 @ 7:23 am
Bill, I think your question should be “anonymous comments on online news sites.” My main beef is that the same news organizations that have stringent ethics policies and standards for reporters when it comes to anonymous sources are allowing anonymous commenting on their websites. Also, one of the things we tried to avoid when I was reporting was becoming part of the story. There have been numerous instances now where anonymous blog comments and comments on online stories are mentioned in news articles. I believe it was at a recent CdA City Council meeting that online comments were discussed. And let’s not forget the recent lawsuit Tina Jacobson filed against the SR because of an insinuation by an anonymous commenter. While many people believe they are “safe” because they post comments under a pseudonym, that is not always the case. Whether those who know the people behind the pseudonyms are forced to reveal those identities in court, or accidentally let it slip, it is naive to think that your identity will be protected. Even if you don’t feel safe posting under your real name, there should still be some level of decorum. Don’t say things you wouldn’t want your name associated with. Be truthful. Be civil. There’s a difference between dialogue and online bullying and those managing our local newspaper’s blogs and story comments don’t seem to care one way or the other. Civility does not = page hits. Page hits = online ad revenue. It comes down to the bottom line.
Comment by TarynThompson — April 6, 2013 @ 8:06 am
Taryn Thompson,
Thank you! Your alternate wording was indeed more to the point.
Old school (not suggesting that you’re “old”…!) journalism attained the public’s confidence because we, the readers, sensed that what we were reading wasn’t raw information. It was raw information that had gone through the processes of authentication, verification, and second-or-third-set-of-eyes (editors) review. In that sense, old school journalism very closely resembled finished intelligence or a case brought to court for criminal prosecution.
It seems as if that old school journalism model for news production and delivery is no longer financially viable. That’s as much our fault as consumers of news as it is the fault of the news producers. We’re uncritically willing to accept raw unverified information and sometimes even bald-faced opinion as if it was “news.” It does not help when a newspaper allows its columnists and even reporters and editors to blog under the newspaper’s nameplate.
Comment by Bill — April 6, 2013 @ 9:57 am
^Like
Comment by Dan — April 6, 2013 @ 9:59 am
I agree – it is sensationalism that drives up page hits and that is in order to attract advertisers. It was not that long ago when news sites were battling
“trolls” cropping up in massive links from porn sites. Sure glad that was cleared up but I was concerned and somewhat misled as to why there was not more of an outcry from the general public. Nobody seemed to care that a porn link would pop up right above the local librarian’s name. Kind of a mess back then, but I am sure those links drove page hits and well, it is all fixed now, but few remember. Sometimes, I feel like I am reading those ridiculous responses you read on Yahoo sites, locally. However, I recognize some of the anonymous comments so, I find value in some of them. The most value, of course, is from those who comment/blog with their own name. When you think about it, there are not many folks, locally, who actually use there real name.
When my ‘real name’ was almost left off the recall petition because of a county error, it almost got a news story. However, some stories are portrayed so poorly, they actually minimize and slant the situation and then you are up for the next hanging. It wasn’t worth the risk, I would rather write about it myself.
Comment by Stebbijo — April 6, 2013 @ 10:12 am
Also, on the Jacobson/Cook/Cowles case – I noticed on the data repository site, there was a hearing March 11 and before that a bankrupsty filing of some sort. No word from local papers updating this case as of yet – Hearing result for Status Conference scheduled on 03/11/2013. Also, the case was listed as “inactive” on 02/20/2013. Must be a dead story.
Comment by Stebbijo — April 6, 2013 @ 11:53 am
Stebbijo:
Bringing false allegations against anyone has consequences, Linda Cook is typical of HBO’s bloggers – throwing mud and hiding (okay – I don’t use my real name either 🙂 In this case, they were challenged on these false allegations and could not prove anything. Linda Cook filed for bankruptcy which is an example that HBO’s bloggers are morally bankrupt too. The question that I have is – what happens when she comes out of bankruptcy?
Comment by curious1 — April 7, 2013 @ 9:14 am
curious1,
Good comment.
I think to answer your closing question with any certainty, we’d first have to know the outcome of the defamation lawsuit brought by Tina Jacobson. If there was some sort of settlement between the parties, we’d have to know the terms and conditions of the settlement. I think we’d also have to know the type of bankruptcy filed as well as the terms and conditions agreed upon and imposed by the bankruptcy judge. There are probably other relevant facts we’d need to know but still don’t, too.
Seeking legal counsel and possibly legal redress in court is the proper course of action for a person who believes he or she has been defamed and maybe even financially damaged as a result. Unfortunately the internet “send” button can be like the bell that cannot be unrung or the bullet that cannot be unfired.
Comment by Bill — April 7, 2013 @ 10:26 am
There was no settlement. Attorney’s fees and costs fell on Tina Jacobson to defend her good name against libel. She won but Linda Cook filed for bankruptcy before the case could continue. There are still questions like who is blogger “out of state tatter”? etc. This case will end up the law books as a precedent.
Comment by curious1 — April 7, 2013 @ 5:59 pm
curious1,
Thank you for the additional information.
What is (or are) the precedent(s) you believe this case has set?
Comment by Bill — April 8, 2013 @ 8:58 am
Thank you Taryn and Bill for posting this important subject. I’ve been out of town but want to add my recollection about the SR blog before and after the Tina Jacobsen law suit. Do you agree with me that the HBO blog used to allow a tremendous level of personal ridicule and attack by anonymous commenters?
Many years ago it was why I left that site, along with a number of other folks. My final straw was when someone called me an extremely foul, four-letter word which was not only allowed to stay, it was celebrated.
I think Tina’s law suit woke the SR’s legal folks up to the very real possibility of court ordered payouts. Now they seem to have imposed at least minimal limits on what can be said and done over there, but the site still focuses on the trivial and does not foster substantive discussions on the issues. I do think, though, that Tina’s willingness to stand up to them has helped us all.
We don’t allow personal attacks here on OpenCdA, but I agree with Taryn and Bill that anyone posting under a cover name should be very careful not to say anything personal that they would not say to someone’s face.
Comment by mary — April 8, 2013 @ 9:40 am
Although it is over eight years old, this Harvard Law School conference report titled Blogging, Journalism & Credibility: Battleground and Common Ground is still timely, interesting, and relevant to this discussion.
Comment by Bill — April 8, 2013 @ 3:52 pm
Interesting curious 1 – I kinda of thought that is where it might be going. How can there be a settlement if there is nothing to settle with? Kinda of interesting – if you see a defamation/libel suit coming, you just have to move faster than the plaintiff and of course hold up the case. That is the precedent. No assets, no settlement. However, I don’t have the paperwork, so there is nothing that tells me exactly when Linda Cook filed bankruptsy. But, it sure makes sense how the bankruptsy might fit into the defamation/libel case.
Comment by Stebbijo — April 8, 2013 @ 5:58 pm