The backgrounder blight: A Washington Post reporter offers an interview “on background.” The Post’s media critic calls that transparency. Are they nuts?
The emergence of transparency: Transparency became a new guiding principle in media ethics, touching off a debate over whether it should replace acting independently.
From the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists archives.
Fake News vs. facts: Indira Lakshmanan says the Washington Post deserves a Pulitzer Prize for journalism ethics.
The Post’s investigative journalism “was most extraordinary for its transparency, breaking the fourth wall between the newsroom and readers by revealing those techniques to readers — showing how reporters got the story,” she writes. That reassured the public about the paper’s motives, methods and findings, and inoculated the Post against false claims, she says.
Reading a story with unnamed sources: Bethania Palma quotes experts who say that journalists risk losing audience trust by frequent or unnecessary use of unnamed sources.
“The public, like the reporters and editors putting a story together, should question whether the story is important enough to grant public-facing anonymity to the sources making the claims.”
Smart people tell Nieman Lab what the world of journalism will look like in 2018.
“If this year was about transparency of the journalistic process and how we do our job, next year it will be about transparency of values and why we do our job,” say Millie Tran and Stine Bauer Dahlberg.
Poynter Institute gives guidelines for covering sexual abuse: “Journalists have a great obligation to investigate stories that potentially involve many victims.”