Blogging? Let's talk ethics

Bloggers can write anything they want, right? Or at least until they cross the line? But where *is* that line--or is there one? In the recent movie hit The Social Network, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg was portrayed as an obsessive blogger with an adolescent view of women, who as a Harvard student blogged pretty offensive and insulting things about his girlfriend. Is that unethical, or just poor interpersonal skills?

Are blogs that are offensive and racist unethical? What about blogs in which people share things about themselves -- and others -- that are TMI ("too much information") such as providing details of their sex lives or posting pictures of other people in compromising positions without their consent? And then there are the bloggers who make unsupported accusations about people, companies, or organizations.

Where is the line (beyond the laws governing obscenity, indecency, libel and slander)? And what should you know and do to be an ethical and responsible blogger?

First, we need to consider what blogs are, and how they are different from other forms of mass media. Blogs first emerged on the internet scene as a sort of online and public journal or diary, allowing a blogger (that is, anyone) to share personal happenings, feelings and perspectives with others.

As blogging grew, bloggers then took this basic capability in many directions. Some stayed in the personal zone, while others began to rival journalism with reports and editorial-type perspectives on politics and world events that were well-written, smart analyses even though the writers were not professional journalists. As bloggers built broad audiences and committed followings during the early 2000s, the power of blogging became increasingly apparent.

Rebecca Blood, author of The Weblog Handbook: Practical Advice on Creating and Maintaining Your Blog, notes in an online article on weblog ethics:

Weblogs are the mavericks of the online world. Two of their greatest strengths are their ability to filter and disseminate information to a widely dispersed audience, and their position outside the mainstream of mass media. Beholden to no one, weblogs point to, comment on, and spread information according to their own, quirky criteria. 

Let's compare blogs to several pre-existing forms of media. Blogs have some similarities to, but also some differences from, each of these kinds of media.

Blogs as essays. In the past, anyone could express their opinion by writing an essay, but they couldn't necessarily get it published unless it conformed to certain standards and principles set forth by the publishing company or magazine. This filtered out the gratuitous, tasteless or offensive content that publishers felt would offend readers' sensibilities or cause a publication to be panned. The other option, self-publishing, was available but required an outlay of capital, and self-publishing also left the would-be writer with cartons of books and no readers unless he or she could find a way to market or distribute them.

Unfortunately, bloggers today no longer have this kind of gatekeeping (beyond the terms of service of their ISP or whoever controls the server upon which their blog is posted) nor do they have the financial barrier to self-publishing, since publishing online is relatively cheap. This leaves the "blogosphere" pretty much wide open to being flooded with lots of stuff that hardly anyone wants to read, and it leaves the job of filtering out the gems from the dirt (the "pointless, incessant barking") up to the readers.

Blogs as journalism. Journalists have a code of ethics that guide their work and their profession. They also have editors and editorial boards that serve as gatekeepers to ensure that what is written is well-researched, fair, objective, and unbiased. Blood comments that: "Journalists are acutely aware of the potential for abuse that is inherent in their system, which relies on support from businesses and power brokers, each with an agenda to promote. Their ethical standards are designed to delineate the journalist's responsibilities and provide a clear code of conduct that will ensure the integrity of the news. Weblogs, produced by nonprofessionals, have no such code."

As far back as 2003, however, Jonathan Dube of Cyberjournalist.net, a Canada-based site that focused on how the internet was changing journalism, proposed A Blogger's Code of Ethics modeled on the SPJ Code of Ethics, with the same three-part schema that included:

Be Honest and Fair

Bloggers should be honest and fair in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.

Bloggers should:
• Never plagiarize.
• Identify and link to sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
• Make certain that Weblog entries, quotations, headlines, photos and all other content do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
• Never distort the content of photos without disclosing what has been changed. Image enhancement is only acceptable for for technical clarity. Label montages and photo illustrations.
• Never publish information they know is inaccurate -- and if publishing questionable information, make it clear it's in doubt.
• Distinguish between advocacy, commentary and factual information. Even advocacy writing and commentary should not misrepresent fact or context.
• Distinguish factual information and commentary from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.

Minimize Harm

Ethical bloggers treat sources and subjects as human beings deserving of respect.

Bloggers should:
• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by Weblog content. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
• Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of information is not a license for arrogance.
• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.
• Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects, victims of sex crimes and criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.

Be Accountable

Bloggers should:
• Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
• Explain each Weblog's mission and invite dialogue with the public over its content and the bloggers' conduct.
• Disclose conflicts of interest, affiliations, activities and personal agendas.
• Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence content. When exceptions are made, disclose them fully to readers.
• Be wary of sources offering information for favors. When accepting such information, disclose the favors.
• Expose unethical practices of other bloggers.
• Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

Blogs as commercial media or advertising. Rebecca Blood notes that "bloggers may not think in terms of control and influence, but commercial media do. Mass media seeks, above all, to gain a wide audience. Advertising revenues, the lifeblood of any professional publication or broadcast, depend on the size of that publication's audience. Content, from a business standpoint, is there only to deliver eyeballs to advertisers, whether the medium is paper or television."

Many bloggers, seeking to make money from their ventures, have found opportunities to profit by endorsing or reviewing products--making their blogs little more than infomercials. In October 2009, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, the mission of which is to protect the interests of consumers, ruled that bloggers who endorse particular commercial products must disclose any payments they have received or face penalties of up to $11,000 per violation. As The Washington Post reported:

The agency, charged with protecting consumer interests, had not updated its policy on endorsements in nearly three decades, well before the Internet became a force in shaping consumer tastes. The new rules attempt to make more transparent corporate payments to bloggers, research firms and celebrities that help promote a product.

Blogs as extended social media comments. Like entries on a Facebook page or the comments field of a news site (allowing readers to comment upon articles), we can also view blogging as the ability to remark candidly about anything and everything. From my experience, the lack of editorial control and lack of wisdom on the part of the people who post and blog are the two greatest contributors to people making absolute fools of themselves (and often an embarrassment to their friends, family and employers).

Blood argues that bloggers have no inherent incentives to maintain any community standards of ethics:

“ Let me propose a radical notion: The weblog's greatest strength — its uncensored, unmediated, uncontrolled voice — is also its greatest weakness. ”

Let me propose a radical notion: The weblog's greatest strength — its uncensored, unmediated, uncontrolled voice — is also its greatest weakness. 

Since news corporations are beholden to advertising interests, she claims, this provides reporters with a true incentive to stay on the good side of their sources, to maintain their professional reputations, and to maintain the support of those who fund them--that is to maintain their journalistic standards in order to maintain their professions and the companies that employ them.

However, Blood notes that, in contrast, "Weblogs, with only minor costs and little hope of significant financial gain, have no such incentives. The very things that may compromise professional news outlets are at the same time incentives for some level of journalistic standards. And the very things that make weblogs so valuable as alternative news sources — the lack of gatekeepers and the freedom from all consequences — may compromise their integrity and thus their value."

SETTING SOME ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR BLOGGING

Rebecca Blood proposes six rules for ethical behavior for online publishers of all kinds, in hope that "these principles will spur discussion about our responsibilities and the ramifications of our collective behavior."

1. Publish as fact only that which you believe to be true.
Honesty still reigns supreme, even in blogging.

2. If material exists online, link to it when you reference it.
In addition to serving as the extension of the academic source citation, the blog hyperlink provides readers the ability to access all relevant and referenced information themselves. As Blood points out, "The Web, used this way, empowers readers to become active, not passive, consumers of information. Further, linking to source material is the very means by which we are creating a vast, new, collective network of information and knowledge."

3. Publicly correct any misinformation.
Everyone makes mistakes, but it is essential for bloggers to not only correct the mistakes but to add a note to the blog clearly indicating that the correction has been made.  Some bloggers even use the strikethrough HTML code -- <strike>wrong information </strike> -- to show that they have revised their page. This is closely related to the next guideline.

4. Write each entry as if it could not be changed; add to, but do not rewrite or delete, any entry.
Blood argues: "Post deliberately. If you invest each entry with intent, you will ensure your personal and professional integrity." She adds:

“ The network of shared knowledge we are building will never be more than a novelty unless we protect its integrity by creating permanent records of our publications. ”

Changing or deleting entries destroys the integrity of the network. The Web is designed to be connected; indeed, the weblog permalink is an invitation for others to link. Anyone who comments on or cites a document on the Web relies on that document (or entry) to remain unchanged. A prominent addendum is the preferred way to correct any information anywhere on the Web.

The only exception to this rule is when you inadvertently reveal personal information about someone else. If you discover that you have violated a confidence or made an acquaintance uncomfortable by mentioning him, it is only fair to remove the offending entry altogether, but note that you have done so.

5. Disclose any conflict of interest.
If you as a blogger have a personal connection to or investment in a company or organization, and particularly when you are promoting its products, it is ethically imperative to let your readers know this so they they can judge your commentary accordingly.

6. Note questionable and biased sources.
If you have cited or drawn material from questionable or biased sources, it is your responsibility to note the nature of the site from which it came, allowing readers to determine the credibility of the source. As Blood notes, "If you strongly feel the piece has merit, say why and let it stand on its own, but be clear about its source. Your readers may cease to trust you if they discover even once that you disguised — or didn't make clear — the source of an article they might have evaluated differently had they been given all the facts."

STYLE AND ETHICS: SOME MAINSTREAM BLOGGING STANDARDS

Finally, some wisdom distributed in the form of an internal memo from New York Times standards editor Craig Whitney to his staff, as condensed and repackaged in March 2009 by Nicholas Carlson of Business Insider:

1. What should be avoided in all of them is any hint of racist, sexist or religious bias, or any suggestion of nasty, snide, sarcastic, or condescending tone — “snark.”
2. If something could easily fit in a satirical Web site for young adults, it probably shouldn’t go into the news pages of nytimes.com.
3. Contractions, colloquialisms and even slang are, generally speaking, more allowable in blogs than in print.
4. Obscenity and vulgarity are not.
5. Unverified assertions of fact, blind pejorative quotes, and other lapses in journalistic standards don’t ever belong in blogs.
6. Writers and editors of blogs must also distinguish between personal tone and voice and unqualified personal opinion.
7. A blog or news column has to give readers the arguments and factual information that led to the writer’s conclusion — enough argument and fact on both or all sides of the issue to enable the reader to decide whether to agree or disagree
8. That does not apply to editorials or Op-Ed columns, which “are not intended to give a balanced look at both sides of a debate,” as the Readers’ Guide says.
9. Headlines on analysis should try to capture the debate rather than taking sides in it.
10. If the comments contain vulgarity, obscenity, offensive personal attacks, say that somebody “sucks,” or are incoherent, moderators are advised just to chuck them out.