It looks like bloggers are now going to be more like traditional journalists. The FTC is considering regulations to keep bloggers from posting a link to an online retailer and getting commissions from sales. Basically, conflicts of interest that journalists (are supposed to) refrain from will be regulated for bloggers, too.
As more and more people turn to blogs for information, we can expect to see more regulations so that journalistic standards apply to all forms of journalism.
When looking at user comments on newspaper web sites, it makes you wonder how user-generated content should be handled. Many ignorant or tasteless people comment on web sites with incredibly offensive opinions. Things can get especially heated when the subject of the story is controversial and two differing opinions are represented on the boards. Is the newspaper responsible for these comments since they are appearing on its web site?
It’s a hard line to walk when it comes to user-generated content. On the one hand, you want your readers to be able to respond and be involved. On the other hand, you don’t want offensive things to appear on your web site. One option is moderating the comments, but to approve every one would be a huge job in itself and would keep immediate discussion from happening. Right now, the best answer is to only moderate those that are flagged as offensive by other readers. But it is yet to be seen whether newspapers are legally responsible for these comments.
Last week, I read an article in the New York Times about how one of its reporters (David Rohde) who had been kidnapped in Afghanistan had escaped. As I read this, I wondered “What reporter that got kidnapped?” I’m sure a lot of people thought the same thing.
The New York Times decided not to cover the kidnapping and asked other media outlets to do the same in order to protect the reporter’s safety. The question is would the New York Times have taken the same considerations for any other kidnapping if it hadn’t involved one of its own?
I don’t think so. I understand the safety issue here, but a newspaper, especially one with the prestige of the NYT, has the responsibility of reporting the news, giving important information to the public. If any other person had been kidnapped abroad and the captors had warned the Times not to report on it, I don’t think the Times would have listened. These are thoughts editors at such a renowned newspaper have to think about. People are counting on them for ALL the news.
As a white girl, I’m probably not as sensitive to racial issues as I should be. But I also think there are a lot of people who are much too sensitive to race.
I read this post on fair.org and couldn’t help but think that maybe Ishmael Reed is overreacting a little. There are plenty of negative stories done on white people. I guess the problem here is the title “Black in America.” It draws too much attention to the fact that these subjects are black; it makes their race the emphasis, and Reed worries that it will cause people to make negative generalizations about black people. But I think the only people who will make these generalizations are people who are ignorant and would make uneducated generalizations anyway. One black person acting a certain way doesn’t mean all black people act that way. Just as if a white person is a meth addict doesn’t mean all white people are. Hopefully Reed realizes that not all Americans think that way.
The news media should be color blind and not base stories on color of skin unless it really makes a difference to the story. This goes in the other direction, too, because I’ve heard of some networks not running stories because they involve negative footage of black people. If it’s news, than it’s news. It should run regardless of race.
