Should bloggers be held to the same code of ethics as professional journalists?

by Theodore Douglas

Created on: July 27, 2009   Last Updated: July 28, 2009

When Paul Revere took to his horse the night of April 18th, 1775 to warn the Boston countryside that the British were coming (let us excuse how history exaggerates the tale), we don't read about how each family who heard Revere's cries asked him to stop and produce his credentials before they took up his call to arms. Most knew Revere by name or reputation.

So, what does Paul Revere's ride have to do with blogging versus the work of journalism? First, it reminds us that the concept of publicly sharing one's fears across the countryside is nothing new (though the horse is a woeful substitute for the web). Second, it demonstrates how citizens have long recognized the difference between some unknown fool with a few too many ales in him shouting about the British at their doorway and the identifiable and respected Paul Revere doing the same.

As journalism grows less profitable by the day, the ethics of the whole profession come into crisis. As more newspapers fail, the line between bloggers,citizen journalists and professionals grows harder to distinguish. Nonetheless, when a paid journalist gets his or her information wrong, there is often an outcry. Do we have a right to the same sense of disgust when a blogger does the same?

If we're reading the New York Times or CNN online, we have an expectation that what we read is true. Unfortunately, their errors are growing as such sites try to scoop competitors and get a share of the all-mighty advertising dollar. All too often, these respected bastions of journalistic ethics get their news from bloggers (though they'll hardly advertise that fact) but fail to verify the facts before using them in their stories. Journalists have long been at the top of the news totem pole, as they should be, burdened with the responsibilities of their work, but paid for it. Bloggers, some working for free, others per click, should be treated as 21st century versions of news sources. Like sources of old, they are frequently anonymous and their trustworthiness is difficult to judge, especially when there is a profit motive in them breaking "news."

The only reason we wonder if whether blogs should be treated like traditional news media is because we wrongly think of them as news sources and not what they are: either personal reflections (of a sort) or communicators of gossip and innuendo intended to make a profit. It doesn't mean we have no right to get angry when they spread false information (especially if they're about ourselves),

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>