More on FIA

In our last class, I mentioned "FOIA," the Freedom of Information Act.

Here is some more about FOIA.

According the the Electronic Freedom Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that works with digital journalists, "The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is a federal law that gives people the right to request information kept by federal government agencies.

"The law also requires agencies to make certain information automatically available to the public in online "reading rooms. This includes regulations, general policy statements, staff instructions, final opinions, and other records that affect members of the public.
"Furthermore," according to  the EFF, "FOIA says that information that is or is likely to be frequently requested should be automatically published on the Internet. You can check an office's reading room, which should be accessible from the office's website, to see if the records you are seeking are available online. The U.S. Department of Justice maintains a list of links to federal offices' reading rooms."

Here's a link to more about FOIA and why it's an important tool for journalists.

How--and When--to Use Press Releases in Your Writing, Reporting

It has rightfully been a tough summer for reporters accused of plagiarism.

A Yale grad, and Wall Street Journal intern, was fired for making up people and quotes.

A Kansas City Star reporter was fired after his editors said he lifted material from press releases several times dating back to 2008.

The KC Star reporter said that using unattributed material from press releases was a "widespread practice in journalism (we will talk more about whether that statement is true or not at a later date).

The Poynter Institute has a good checklist on how to, and when to, incorporate press release material in your work. Check it out and let me know what you think.

Is it ever OK to go 'undercover' to get a story or help a client?

Her business card said, "Stephanie Harnett, senior associate, Mercury Public Affairs."  But the union organizers remembers that she said she was a University of Southern California journalism student when she interviewed them.

Now Harnett is out of a job. The company she worked for, and the client she was representing, have denounced her and her undercover tactics.

For a journalist, it is should be a difficult and a last-ditch decision, to go undercover to get a story. Editors must be involved in the decision. 

Gawker's Hamilton Nolan, who broke the story, said it best on how the PR world views going undercover to get information. 

“Even within the PR industry it is considered horribly unethical and scandalous to pose as a reporter in order to spy for a client.” 

Click here to read a round up of coverage and comments. 

Three Plagiarism Cases That Didn't Have to Happen

Remember journalism's rule No. 5 "Be skeptical of everything. If your mother says she loves you, check it out."

Here are three examples where online journalists say they accidentally plagiarized. Their excuse: They thought they copying information from a press release that was sent by a friend. 

That's really no excuse. 

1. Even if "a friend" sends you information about a potential story, it is up to you to verify that information.

2. Press releases can be wrong.  As a journalist, you should verify any and all information, including quotes, contained in the release. Yes, that means re-reporting information in the release.

3. Don't forget attribution, even when using information from a press release. At the bare minimum, attribution, that is telling the reader where you got the information, could save you the embarrassment of being accused of plagiarism.

Click here to read how the Poynter Institute described this series of plagiarism cases. The also are links to the original stories, and the apologies issued by the reporters who made the errors. 

Editor ovehears councilwoman's phone conversation, tweets about it; ethical or not ethical?

'll admit it. One of my favorite websites is poynter.org. It's a gathering place for people in the news media to get a little gossip, learn about some of the new tools for story-telling, and even find a job.

This is the story I was talking about it class. Bob Salladay, a senior editor with California Watch and the Center for Investigative Reporting was on a train sitting near Santa Ana City Council member Michele Martinez. Martinez was talking on her cell phone and Salladay could hear her side of the conversation. He started tweeting what she said. 

Click here for the Poynter story on the what happen. Embedded in the Poynter story are links to three publications that reported on the incident.

One of the issues Poynter asks about is whether you should tweet information you haven't verified. According to "The Element of Journalism" you should. You should always verify before reporting. Remember, if your mother says she loves you, ask someone else to verify her statement.

Don't Blame the Player, Blame the Game

I would have hired Kendra Marr.
Why? Because her resume and my resume are so alike. Same undergrad and grad school. Same love of journalism. We both worked in the San Francisco Bay region. Both of us are women of color.
I think I also understand how the kinds of plagiarism accusations could lead a young reporter to resign from a good job.
Sure, the player has to shoulder the blame. But I blame the game, too.

The Internet, and Internet-research techniques, make is so easy  to find facts, stories, sources and so much more. Sometimes it is easier to use a paragraph or two from an already published source than it is to report it out yourself. And don't get me started about cutting and pasting. Yes, I can understand how someone can cut and paste reference material on the wrong take (Google Docs, anyone?) and , in the rush to deadline, forget what is yours and what belongs to someone else.
Too easy to make a series of career-ending errors.
Back in the day there was a warning that "Speed Kills." Maybe for 21st century journalism the saying should be "Speed Kills Careers."
Being first, especially for websites such as Politico, is important. Maybe too important. Top the "we're first" syndrome with making sure you post hypes of your story on Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin and whatever other flavor of the day social media channel you use.
Sometimes it seems if there isn't any time to check back with a source or make the second phone call, or, even worse, tell the editor that the story won't be ready until tomorrow.
I share your pain, Kendra. I see myself in you and realize that it could have been me.
But I blame the game, too. These days, journalism is about speed more than it is about accuracy and objectivity.
That's why I'm not so quick to blame the player. I gotta blame the game.

Good writing or lack of transparency?

Paul Farhi of the Washington Post started a controversy with a story that pointed out that the highly-regarded New Yorker story that reconstructed the raid that led U.S. military forces to, and ultimately kill,  Osama Bin-Laden. 
Farhi did not bad mouth the job reporter Nicholas Schmidle did on the article, "Getting Bin Laden". The writing is top notch. No one has disputed the accuracy of the story. The Post's Farhi, takes on Schmidle's sourcing. "He relied on the accounts of others who had debriefed the" SEALs, Farhi wrote. "A casual reader of the article wouldn't know that."
"Neither the article nor an editor’s note describes the sourcing for parts of the story. Schmidle, in fact, piles up so many details about some of the men, such as their thoughts at various times, that the article leaves a strong impression that he spoke with them directly," Farhi added.
What do you think? Did Schmidle and his editors need to add some kind of note or post script about the sources of the story?