The trend of traditional news organizations to let their Web sites scoop print editions is raising new concerns over journalistic ethics, accuracy and accountability.
One-third of print news publishers let their online counterpart run such original content first, according to the latest "Media in Cyberspace" study.
For PR professionals and new media consultants, the trickle-down effect of this ethical debate centers on accountability. PR professionals can most affect accountability, urging publishers to own up to errors and to provide a forum for subscribers to react.
However, these sites are being slammed for valuing immediacy over fact-checking.
News organizations' efforts to correct mistakes will impact online news credibility most, says Steve Outing, an online publishing consultant and media analyst in Boulder, Colo.
Online news organizations must be as upfront as possible about posting corrections and clarifications and the Internet can make this process instantaneous. Traditional news organizations have a long way to go in communicating corrections online says Outing, who regularly writes about the challenges of new media publishing on his Web site Planetary News (http://www.planetarynews.com).
CNET is among the more responsible, posting corrections prominently, he adds.
So far, the most obvious way is to immediately post the correction and re-edit the story. Beyond that, depending on the degree of the error, online news organizations should consider emailing correction messages to subscribers. But it's not enough to modify the story without acknowledging what the changes were, a common MSNBC practice, he says.
Traditional Newspapers Have Upper Hand
The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal has taken the online ethics debate to a new level, particularly among traditional news organizations.
For example, the Dallas Morning News Web site scooped its print edition to report that a secret service agent would testify that he saw the President in a compromising situation with the intern. The story that was posted January 26, which prompted an onslaught of follow-up coverage by television stations and other newspapers, turned out to be wrong and sloppily reported. The paper violated its own rule of requiring two independent sources when reporting information anonymously, damaging its image. So what does this mean for the PR professional?
The Detroit News also embarrassed itself when it reported a story describing Monica Lewinsky's home page on America Online. The site was a hoax and the newspaper admitted it did not check the authenticity before running the story on Jan. 22. AOL declared the site a hoax and pulled the story on the same day.
In spite of these online blunders, newspapers should not be squeamish about promoting their online sites and including more original content.
And PR professionals can view the Web as a new outlet for online branding. Online branding opportunities that can be spearheaded by PR professionals include reader forums, monitored chat rooms with discussion leaders and electronic town halls about hot-button issues.
"These papers have terrific credibility in their own communities that can and should be better transferred to their Web sites," says Jane Wilson, a new media consultant in Pennington, N.J.
Online Value Judgments
While news organizations go through their online growing pains, basic ethical principles should guide the process. For example, make sure stories have been adequately researched and attributed before posting and draw clear distinctions between advertising and editorial. And PR professionals can help keep the image intact.
If there continues to be a reckless regard for breaking the story first online, no matter how many times the news organization runs corrections and revises stories, online credibility will ultimately be shot, says Eric Meyer, a new media analyst and professor of journalism at the University of Illinois.
"Many times there just isn't any truth in reporting, today's allegations become bigger allegations tomorrow. We need to get away from breathless play-by-play coverage and wait to report on more of the complete picture," he says.
Although most mainstream newspapers are guided by some fairly basic ethical guidelines on news judgment, how they are transferred to their Web sites varies.
The controversial online scooping issue is a case in point. Although the Dallas Morning News is comfortable with using its site to break bombshell stories, Boston.com follows an emphatic rule against scooping its print counterpart, the Boston Globe, says Ande Zellman, an associate editor for the paper. To keep its fresh edge, the paper uses news wires to update its online stories.
"I don't understand how some well-regarded newspapers are getting out of control online," says Zellman. (Planetary News, Steve Outing, 303/543-7810; Jane Wilson, 609/737-7094; Eric Meyer, 217/355-0016; Boston.com, Ande Zellman, 617/929-3021)
Online branding opportunities, that have yet to be fully tapped, can be spearheaded by PR professionals. These include reader forums, monitored chat rooms with discussion leaders and electronic town halls on hot-button issues.