“‘Comment is Free, but Facts Are Sacred’: User-generated Content and Ethical Constructs at the Guardian”

Article by Singer and Ashman

Summary by Jon Greig

Singer & Ashman performed a case study with the journalists at the Guardian, a British newspaper and its affiliated website. Their concern was in how Guardian’s journalists incorporated and assessed user-generated content in their practice as well as how they handled personal and social ethics in the digital network.

Clearly, digital media has transformed the world of journalism in the last ten or so years and has consequently created a number of challenges for journalists. Ethical concerns have arisen as journalist more frequently interact with the public through digital and on-line mediums.

Case Study:
Journalists at the Guardian responded to in-depth interviews and questionnaires, responding with key words and phrases regarding what they considered “good” journalism. They also responded to questions regarding key ethical issues related to user-generated content. The following is a report of findings:

Key Traits of “Good” Journalism:

Accuracy – most often mentioned in connection to credibility, responsibility, and overall competence.

Honesty/Balance/Fairness – associated with credibility, responsibility, thoroughness, expertise, and notions of authority in connection with credibility and competence

Autonomy – respondents specified freedom from commercial, political, managerial, and government pressures, as well as free speech and the ability to develop as personal voice.

UGC Ethical Concerns:
Regarding key ethical issues of user-generated content, respondents did value the providing space for debate but expressed concern about the abuse of privilege.

Quote: “The platform gives credibility to people whose comments may be completely inaccurate, offensive, or without foundation in fact.”

However, respondents felt that UGC was linked to the values of universal free speech. People have the right to have their voice heard without intimidation.

Exploring Ethical Constructs:
Further ethical issues were explored in the case study under the headings of 2 research questions. They explored how journalists perceive and enact Authenticity & Credibility, Freedom and Autonomy, Responsibility & Accountability, and how they negotiate new relationships with users. I will briefly summarize the findings under each subheading of the research questions.

Authenticity & Credibility
The extent to which UGC challenges or undermines personal and institutional credibility at the Guardian was a major concern with respondents. The challenge lies in how to assess or improve the credibility of UGC. Many respondents value UGC discourse but were concerned about undermining the brand, especially as it relates to personal attacks and nasty comments.

The simple matter pointed out was the time it takes to respond to users who challenge facts, make personal attacks, or simply have disagreements of opinion. On the other hand, having opinions challenged encourages journalists to put extra effort into getting their facts right in the first place.

Freedom & Autonomy
Another concern that arose in the research was that UGC had the potential to erode profession autonomy. Journalists want to maintain their freedom to write and print what they like. They are concerned about “dumbing down” content and posting content simply to attract more on-line hits.

Responsibility & Accountability
Respondents felt a responsibility to uphold the values of the Guardian and editors felt a “duty of care” to their writers. Also expressed was an obligation to the reader, to provide quality content and discourse, as well as maintaining a civilized discourse.

One respondent said, “With citizen journalists, it’s all rights and no responsibilities.” The concern here is that discourse becomes uncivil because UGC users are anonymous and don’t have to take any real responsibility in what they write.

Negotiating New Relationships
A major theme from respondents was the complexity of negotiating new and closer forms of interaction with the audience. However, their comfort levels varied. One editor said, despite the drawbacks of UGC, “It’s made it a much more balanced site.” Others have been taken back by the rude, almost abusive, confrontational discourse.

A few suggestions were provided for negotiating new relationships:

1. Thanks users who correct errors

2. Engage users who raise interesting points

3. Ignore the obnoxious

Overall, UGC has spurred reconsideration of what the relationship between journalists and the public has been and might become.

Conclusion:
The evidence suggests that journalists are struggling with how to ethically accommodate opportunities for free dialogue presented by UGC while also safeguarding their credibility and sense of responsibility. The internet affords individuals much freedom for expression, but the responsibility in expressing that freedom lies solely with the user. Profound challenges for journalists in dealing with UGC continue to exist.

Quote: “…journalists face challenges in a network that they did not confront when the product they alone produced was one they alone controlled.”