The first lesson one learns in a newsroom is that a journalist is as good as her most recent report, and past excellence does not guarantee immunity from any present shortcoming. In the age of social media, there is a need to expand on this lesson. While journalistic excellence may be ephemeral, posts on social media are immortal. I am forced to look into the relationship between social media and writing in general, and social media and journalism in particular, because of four recent developments.
Four stories
In the first, a tweet by ESPN’s Jemele Hill — “Donald Trump is a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself w/ other white supremacists” — kicked up a controversy in the U.S. ESPN issued a statement distancing itself from the tweet, but that further polarised popular opinion. While supporters of the U.S. President felt that the reaction of the media house was weak, those opposed to the President felt that ESPN had caved to pressure from the political establishment.
At a literary event in New York, novelist Zadie Smith explained the fickle nature of opinions on social media, and the bane of instant evaluation. “I want to have my feeling, even if it’s wrong, even if it’s inappropriate — express it to myself in the privacy of my heart and my mind,” she said. “I don’t want to be bullied out of it.”
Closer home, the digital publication Quint terminated the services of its contributing writer, Suprateek Chatterjee, following a tweet by him that was undoubtedly offensive to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It also decided to take down all his contributions from its site.
In the fourth incident, a tweet by senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai exposed fellow television anchor, Arnab Goswami. Mr. Goswami, in a public event, came up with a story of his brush with a murderous gang near the Chief Minister’s residence during the 2002 Gujarat riots. The person who encountered that experience was not Mr. Goswami, but Mr. Sardesai. Mr. Goswami’s fiction would have gone unnoticed if the video of his speech had not been uploaded on a social networking site. The attempts to take it down have been futile. The cache has given it a new lease of life. These four issues are about social media, but they are not similar. ESPN disassociated itself from the tweet, but did not initiate punitive action, whereas Quint sacked the contributor and has taken down all his work. Zadie Smith’s speech was about the nature of social media. For her, abstaining is the solution to all the problems posed by networking sites. Mr. Goswami is an exception. His articulation was not an opinion but a straightforward lie.
Impact on journalism
My concern is not about the reaction of news organisations to social media posts by journalists; I am worried about the impact of impulsive reactions by journalists on social media on journalism. Taking down contributions by writers for their social media opinions, however unacceptable these posts may be, is not an option. It is also true that the cyberspace never forgets. Past social media behaviour always catches up with journalists in an awkward manner and has the potential to cast shadows on the news organisation that she works for.
There is a need for Indian editors and journalists to reflect on this issue and come up with a viable code. In 2011, the Ethics and Values Committee of the American Society of News Editors (ASNE) took a considered view of the relationship between journalists and their social media posts. It argued that draconian rules may discourage creativity and innovation, but cautioned that allowing an uncontrolled free-for-all would open the floodgates to problems, and leave news organisations responsible for irresponsible employees.
The ASNE’s committee came up with 10 broad guidelines and following them may protect journalists from potential grief. It does not make any ethical distinction between traditional media and online content. It assumes that everything one writes online will become public. It draws attention to that elusive entity called readers’ perception. It urges reporters to break news on their own institutional websites and not on Twitter. And it also contains one editor’s pithy admonishment: “Don’t be stupid.”
readerseditor@thehindu.co.in