Transparency, disclosure, conflict and judgment
My wife and her brothers own property next to the Coliseum. Every so often, the city, the sports council or the coliseum manager make noises about buying it. That makes the news. We have a rule at the paper that whenever we write about the property we add a paragraph that says something like, "The property is owned by Susan Robinson and her brothers. Robinson is the wife of News & Record editor John Robinson." I have no inside information or say, for that matter, about what happens with the property. My wife is a former journalist and understands that what becomes of the property is in the public interest. So I'm appropriately shut out.
No, nothing is in the news about the property. This is about disclosure.
Mark Glaser at MediaShift has posed an interesting question: Should bloggers avoid conflicts of interest as journalists do?
Nov. 28 update: Glaser posts his responses here.
He quotes TechCrunch blogger Michael Arrington, who writes about his friends and wants them to succeed in Silicon Valley.
So what do you think about this stance and others by bloggers who feel that they can give honest commentary even though they have conflicts of interest? Will bloggers lose credibility by having these conflicts, or will disclosures help keep everything transparent? Is there something bloggers like Arrington can do to minimize conflicts?
We purposely avoid assigning reporters to write about topics where they have a conflict. An editor told me once that journalists have no friends, and it's true in the context he meant. My friends know that they get no favors from me when it comes to the paper, and I assure you, they've tried.
We pay our way on trips sponsored by groups such as Action Greensboro or the Chamber of Commerce. We don't accept gifts of any value, even though it's occasionally awkward to refuse. Staffers can join civic organizations, but they cannot serve in public relations or communication roles in the group. I know this sounds all very sanctimonious. I apologize for that. We just don't want people to think that we're influenced by gifts or favors. We don't want to feel as if our hands are tied when we ask tough questions trip sponsors or gift givers.
In the end, I think transparency is enough for bloggers, if it is cited often enough. If I know who is paying you, who is sponsoring you, what your history is, I can factor that into what you write. For instance, I know that Ed is associated with the Weatherspoon. I know that Sue is connected to Action Greensboro. I know that Hoggard has a son who played on Grimsley's football team. Their associations give their comments and posts insight but I know that the degree of analysis and/or skepticism will be influenced.
Coincidentally, Blogworks expresses dismay at the lack of transparency in some of the big stories in the blogosphere last week.
If we've come to expect honesty and straight talk from blogging icons, it's because so many blogospheric leaders have told us we should. And now suddenly we're getting the best snarky insider accounts from The New York Times? This isn't competely unexpected. The utopian visions of blogging's ability to transform Corporate America were never realistic (and not necessarily widely held). But it's somewhat surprising how quickly business blogging has become an entity that can't even talk about itself using its own playbook.
Comments (15)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Although "connected" to AG, I'm not paid by AG for my volunteer work there, but I appreciate the appearance of a conflict...and yeah, you should probably include that in your editorial process if ever connecting my name to that organization. (You rarely do: most AG names are more well-known than mine.)
Are you really talking about things like PayPerPost (note: they sponsored ConvergeSouth and I'm a volunteer with the conference)? Bloggers who BLOG about products or services and are paid for that blogging?? Or do you mean that if Hogg's son plays football for Grimsely that it in some way compromises his writing? (not a great example, he always disclaims that, but isn't that the point?)
Robert Scoble writes Disclose Per Post is my policy. Responsible bloggers disclose. Toy companies don't give me toys, but they do give them to Robert. Responsible bloggers disclaim monetary conflicts.
Are you drawing a point to a different kind of disclosure?
Posted on November 20, 2006 12:51 PM
I don't think so. If you're being paid by a company and you mention its product, I think you should disclose. If you have a direct connection -- whether you volunteer or your son is a team member -- I think you should disclose. Most bloggers make their points of view very clear and, at least those 'round here, don't seem to be pushing any specific products.
Posted on November 20, 2006 12:59 PM
Timely topic. Didn't the N&R recently print some promotions (appearing to be testimonials) for the newpaper and its online site using N&R employees - yet without disclosing the employment relationships?
Posted on November 20, 2006 1:58 PM
Yes, we did. (The ads weren't prepared by the news department.) As soon as a couple of us saw them and noticed the oversight, we added the full disclosure information.
Posted on November 20, 2006 2:13 PM
It's worth noting that no matter how often you disclose the property thing in the paper (many, many times just since I've worked here) there are conspiracy theorists who still accuse you of trying to cover it up and cut deals with people related to it.
Transparency only works if people are paying attention.
Posted on November 20, 2006 9:30 PM
Which property? I left a note on Sandy's blog about the old Coke/Canada Dry building. It should be bought by the city before someone else makes an offer. Sandy said that there are enviromental issues.
You can solve some issues by digging an olympic size pool... :)
Posted on November 21, 2006 12:59 AM
My disclosure policy is here. I have no less than one link on every page of my website that links to it with some pages having as many as 3 links to my Disclosure Policy.
Fact is: I never endorse any product or service I write about. It's true that I write commercials but what I never say is that a particular advertiser is any better than any other business. I try to write my commercials in such a way that readers will understand they are reading a commercial and when an advertiser allows disclosure on the ad I happily give it.
If a reader posts a negative comment about an advertiser I leave it live for everyone to view and when I find the comment I will update the post to reflect the fact that a reader expressed negative feelings about that product. How would that go over with the companies your advertising department sells ads to?
I REFUSE any advertisement that REQUIRES a positive tone even if I happen to like their products and services. In other words: I turn away more advertisers than I take in. I'd like to see ANY media company who can truthfully make the same statement.
That said: While I do get paid for commercials on my blog I give away far more advertising than I charge for, often to local companies who don't even know who I am until AFTER the fact.
Posted on November 21, 2006 9:52 AM
John
Why has the N & R become strangely silent on the police mess? I think silence will validate Jerry Bledsoe's accusations in a lot of peoples mind.
Posted on November 21, 2006 5:27 PM
I'm not sure what you want to know, Wayne, but I will say that Jerry Bledsoe's accusations aren't a new thing to us.
Posted on November 21, 2006 5:37 PM
I guess what I would like for the N & R to do is come out fighting. At least defend your position
Posted on November 21, 2006 5:53 PM
Have you ever heard the expression, "Don't swing at a pitch in the dirt?" He and the Rhino have spent an awful lot of time and energy over the past 10 years criticizing us for this, that and the other. Some of it is justfied, most of it isn't. This isn't. But I'm not going to waste our newsprint countering the innuendo. I think most readers can see where the storyline is going.
Posted on November 21, 2006 5:59 PM
My problem with the disclosure on this property is that it is you WIFE'S property. Not yours. If you were the owner it would be different.
Why is it the expectation that women can't do/accomplish on their own without it having to reflect in some way the "man of the house?"
When I served on the Zoning Commission people would ask my husband why I voted one way or the other.He would tell them, "I have no idea. Ask her." My professional life is my own and my husband has no influence in it, nor does he want any.
Why, John, do you have to explain what your wife does? Certainly she's capable of conducting her business without your input. I suspect you and she know that. It's the public's need to know that is driving this and frankly, it's none of their damn business.
Posted on November 22, 2006 9:31 AM
I don't disagree with you. My wife is more than capable of conducting her business without me. In fact, she's better off. Still, the concern is that if we aren't upfront about the relationship, then some people will think that we're attempting to hide it for whatever nefarious purpose. We're not a very trusting community.
Posted on November 22, 2006 9:37 AM
Grimsley football? I've never heard of Grimsley football...
I'm siding with Wayne's lament above and was trying to provoke you guys in my latest post. (in case you didn't notice)
I do understand about swinging in the dirt, and I know well Jerry B's contempt for the N&R although others, perhaps the majority of your readers, may not. And I knew from the second installment on that he was going to place much of the blame for the whole Wray thing at the N&R's feet....
But still... I wish you guys would come out fighting like Wayne suggests.
Believe it or not, the Rhino series IS news after all. Report on it... somehow.
Posted on November 28, 2006 9:39 AM
Is it news? I don't know. There's a writer we don't trust writing for a publication we don't trust, basing much of his reporting on the memories of an ex-chief who won't talk with us. Dismantling our coverage? Well, the ex-chief and Bledsoe are certainly writing that from their perspective. I'm still awaiting the story, other than, as you say, it signaled early that much of the blame would be placed at our feet. (Despite that, I wasn't asked for an interview until about week 10 of the series.)
Posted on November 28, 2006 12:24 PM