Featured Posts

Tips For Live Tweeting An Event Live tweets from an event are a great way to catch people's attention and build a following. Especially if they're done right. I've live tweeted several events, most notably Barack Obama's Inauguration...

Read more

10 Pros And 10 Cons Of Twitter For Journalists Like anything, Twitter has its advantages and disadvantages. Whether you're new to Twitter or not, it's important you're able to identify these and adjust to use Twitter in the best ways possible. Here's...

Read more

How To Verify A Tweet Twitter is the great equalizer. It doesn't matter if you have 100 followers or 10,000, you can break news. That's because all tweets are recorded and indexed at search.twitter.com. If someone types the...

Read more

Short And Sweet: A New Generation Of News If it's not in 140 characters or less, you may lose them. They glance at what you say. If you're good, they may spend a few extra seconds. If not, they've moved on. Words. Links. Short, sweet, and...

Read more

The Many Ways Journalists Can Use Twitter Because of its simplicity, Twitter has great potential for many different uses and applications. With a little creativity, the possibilities are nearly endless. A recent survey out of Norway sheds...

Read more

Washington Post Institutes New Twitter Policy

Posted by Craig Kanalley | Posted in News | Posted on 26-09-2009

Tags: , , ,

Comments

The Washington Post took swift action after controversial tweets from one of its managing editors Raju Narisetti disclosed opinions on healthcare reform and the hospitalization of Sen. Robert Byrd.

Not only has Narisetti since closed his Twitter account, but the Post on Friday implemented a series of new social networking guidelines. It says the guidelines had previously been in the works, but editors “decided to accelerate the completion of [them]” after the Narisetti incident.

While it has not released the guidelines to the public, some parts of it were shared on the blog of ombudsman Andrew Alexander.

A few highlights:

  • “nothing we do [on Twitter and Facebook] must call into question the impartiality of our news judgment.”
  • “Post journalists must refrain from writing, tweeting or posting anything – including photographs or video – that could be perceived as reflecting political racial, sexist, religious or other bias or favoritism that could be used to tarnish our journalistic credibility.”

The new guidelines, as shared, would seem to have an impact on some of the Post’s more creative and popular Twitterers like Howard Kurtz (@HowardKurtz) and Chris Cillizza (@TheFix).

Both immediately addressed the concerns.

  1. HowardKurtz
    HowardKurtz Under new WP guidelines on tweeting, I will now hold forth only on the weather and dessert recipes. 26 Sep 2009 from web
  2. HowardKurtz
    HowardKurtz Actually, I always assumed you shouldn’t tweet anything you wouldn’t say in print or on the air. Diff betw having thoughts and being biased. 26 Sep 2009 from web
  3. HowardKurtz
    HowardKurtz Apparently I just lost one follower who lacks confidence that I will be as charming and insightful as ever under new WP rules. Gimme a shot! 26 Sep 2009 from web
  4. The Fix
    TheFix Also, lots of question about the Fix Twitter feed in light of new Post policy. This feed will KEEP ON ROCKING ;) 27 Sep 2009 from web

— this quote was brought to you by quoteurl

Media analysts, journalism professors and professional journalists weighed in on the new guidelines, mostly criticizing them as a step backward for the Post.

  1. Jay Rosen
    jayrosen_nyu Something is seriously “off” at the Washington Post; I wish I knew more about the culture to know what it is. For now: “the print guys won.” 26 Sep 2009 from web
  2. Jeff Jarvis
    jeffjarvis Washington Post turns journalists into antisocial mannequins. So much for new connections to the community. 26 Sep 2009 from Tweetie
  3. Dan Kennedy
    dankennedy_nu Hard to believe that WP was the leader in big-paper online innovation just a few years ago. 26 Sep 2009 from TweetDeck
  4. Matt Welch
    mleewelch WP Tweet-ban worse than I thought: It’s to avoid letting people see what the newsvolk REALLY think. Transparency! http://tinyurl.com/yabrc3x 26 Sep 2009 from web
  5. Mathew Ingram
    mathewi not sure what to say about the new WaPo social-media policy and the fact that an ME quit Twitter as a result: http://is.gd/3H1JM 26 Sep 2009 from TweetDeck
  6. Alan Mairson
    AlanMairson . @mathewi WaPo Twitter policy sounds like journo equiv of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Bizarre for people paid to ask & tell. 27 Sep 2009 from TweetDeck in reply to mathewi
  7. Jeremy Littau
    jlittau You get on Twitter to show a human face, Washington Post. Dumb policy on the use of social media. http://is.gd/3HJiJ 27 Sep 2009 from web

— this quote was brought to you by quoteurl

  • tedmay
    Mijn annoe heeft een heel schraal gevoel nadat ik pepercocktail heb gezopen in urk
  • Of course, we don't yet know what the policy is. Narisetti may have just quit to avoid criticism. But it does seem like this is a head-in-the-sand reaction.

    Social media has NOTHING to do with objectivity.
  • ckanal
    Yeah, the opting out altogether is what gets me. Nice write-up! Thanks for sharing.
  • I agree. It reminds me of 3 or 4 years ago when newspapers had strict policies about who could blog. I remember hearing editors talk about how columnists could blog, but other reporters probably couldn't handle it. If you don't trust your people in 140 characters, how can you trust them talking to strangers for 140 inches?
    Nice work yourself. I like how you've told today's tale through Twitter screen shots.
  • Nicole
    I agree with a policy such as this. It DOES damage your credibility as a journalist if you put your political, religious or other beliefs on display....particularly on a tool like Twitter that you use as part of your job. You might know in your heart that you're not a biased journalist, but perception is everything. If the public views you as biased, then it damages your credibility and ability to do your job. Twitter (and other forms of social media) are for providing color and interacting with readers. You can do that without allowing your personal views to leak out.
  • ckanal
    Maybe. But to interact with readers, don't you need a little personality? Or should Twitter be used merely to distribute information and provide relevant info to readers? If that's the case, it sounds an awful lot like the old "push" model for journalism. What about give and take? Isn't that more valuable?

    I'm not saying opinions are needed, especially for serious stories, and the Washington Post managing editor was wrong for doing that, but my view is you need a human element to make it work. And not just "info only" robot mode.
  • Nicole
    Sure you can have personality. But the personality you display (in your public persona, as a professional) should not at any time include your opinions or show a bias in any way. It's a fine line to walk, but it's ALWAYS been that way. Not displaying a bias is a basic rule of good journalism....and those rules don't go away just because we have new ways to interact with an audience.
  • ckanal
    OK, well, I agree with that. But I also feel this policy is a bit strict and kind of silly in general, and we don't even know the entire guidelines because they're not public.
blog comments powered by Disqus