13 Comments

Summary:

Bloomberg has come out with a social-media policy for its journalists which, like many other such policies, talks a lot about what not to do, and why social media is bad. Why not talk about some of the ways journalists should be using these tools?

3256859352_cf35412c5f_z

Social media tools like Twitter and Facebook have been around for several years now, but some media organizations are still just getting around to figuring out how to handle them — and in many cases, as we’ve written before, they spend a lot of time talking about what journalists should not do, and very little about what they should do. Bloomberg is the latest to come out with this kind of social-media policy, which spends most of its time telling staff all the things they should avoid doing.

The Bloomberg policy, which was sent to the Emedia Vitals blog by a source, starts off well enough, by saying that social networks and social-media platforms are “a powerful way to reach millions of new readers and expand the impact of our reporting,” and that social media “is a useful complement to our work so long as principles of fairness, accuracy and transparency are upheld.” So far, so good.

Then, however, the policy goes on to list all the things that reporters and editors with Bloomberg shouldn’t do. Staff “should not use social networks to express political opinions or to advocate on behalf of a particular issue or agenda,” and posts on any network or platform “should never express bias based on race, sex, religion, or nationality.” Reporters and editors “cannot use social media to express opinions related in any way to their professional assignment or beat.” Staff are also forbidden to join any groups or social networks that are dedicated to a particular political opinion or cause, are not allowed to “engage in arguments with those critical of our work,” and are not allowed to mention any internal discussions or meetings.

All of these restrictions and bans are very similar to the ones that the Toronto Star newspaper laid out in its new social-media policy, which I wrote about recently: never discuss stories in development, do not talk about newsroom issues, don’t express any opinions about the topics you cover, and don’t respond to readers.

These kinds of policies have a number of flaws — including the fact that much of what they are prohibiting is either common sense or impossible to police (or both). During a discussion of policies on Twitter on Tuesday, journalism professor Jeff Jarvis echoed a motto tweeted by Katie Rosman of the Wall Street Journal, who said that deputy managing editor Alan Murray told her the best policy was “Don’t be stupid.” And John Paton, CEO of the Journal-Register Co. newspaper chain and architect of its digital-first strategy, posted his own social-media policy recently, which told employees to consider three points — all of which were blank (the implication being that there are no explicit rules).

One of the biggest flaws of most policies is that they spend so much time talking about how bad social media is for the profession, and so little time talking about what makes it useful, or how to approach it as a positive tool for journalism. About the only positive thing that both the Bloomberg policy and the Toronto Star policy are willing to admit to is that social media such as Twitter and Facebook are really good for promoting your content (although Bloomberg does mention that it’s “good etiquette” to occasionally link to interesting work created by others, which is more than many policies do).

But social tools are good for so much more than just promoting content — not to mention that if all a journalist does is promote his or her content, people will quickly determine that their account is just self-promotional spam, and pay little attention. So what would a positive social-media policy recommend? Here are a few suggestions that I’ve come up with — feel free to add your own in the comments:

  • Talk to people: this has nothing to do with promoting your own content. It means engaging in conversation about issues, and responding to and/or asking questions of others. It’s called a conversational medium for a reason. Unfortunately, most media outlets explicitly forbid this.
  • Reply when you are spoken to: if you don’t respond when someone asks you a direct question or makes a point in reference to you, it’s like ignoring someone who is standing right beside you and talking to you. That doesn’t mean responding to every troll or flame.
  • Re-tweet others: social media gets very boring if all you do is post links to your own things, or post your own thoughts. Lots of other people have interesting things to say — find some and re-tweet them. Maybe they will return the favor.
  • Link to others: the same goes for links — social media is a tremendous tool for finding interesting content, and you should share it when you find it, not just keep it to yourself. If you do this, others are more likely to share your links when you post them.
  • Admit when you are wrong: this is difficult for many journalists, since we like to pretend that we never get anything wrong — which everyone knows is untrue. So be transparent, as much as it pains you, and admit when you got something wrong. It builds trust.
  • Be human, but not too human: it’s okay to show emotion — in fact, it’s good, because it shows that you are human, and people relate to other people. It’s called social media for a reason. But be the best version of yourself — and don’t ever tweet drunk :-)

Those are just some of the principles that make social media what it is, but I have yet to see a social-media policy — apart from possibly the blogging and commenting guidelines at The Guardian — that focuses on this kind of behavior, instead of spending all its time talking about what could go wrong, or telling reporters and editors things they shouldn’t do.

Thumbnail photo courtesy of Flickr user Rosaura Ochoa

  1. SamWoodward Tuesday, May 3, 2011

    You hit the nail on the head. That’s the appeal for sites like http://www.quora.com that inform & engage.

    Share
    1. Thanks, Sam — totally agree. Appreciate the comment.

      Share
  2. Excellent post! I lead social media for a large tech company and your suggestions are spot on, not only for journalists but for businesses as well :)

    Share
  3. Matt, It’s no brainer to see that social media is here to stay for good. Given vast variety of the existing channels to choose and stick with, it’s time for such a hot space to enter into a new category. There is a need for a portal to provide a quick and intelligent decision for both the consumer and the enterprise about their online connections.

    A Platform to Help us to Distinguish Our Quality vs. Quantity Friends, Fans, Followers, and Companies

    Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube, Flickr and others have been doing a decent job of providing additional marketing exposure and even in some cases, additional revenue. However, as more and more social networking sites pop up, how do you manage your brand across all these channels? Maybe more importantly, which one of these sites should you select as the one that will help you best reach your target audience? The proliferation of the social media avenues is becoming overwhelming.

    This glut of information reminds me of the early 90’s when WWW was adopted broadly by the general public. Every company rushed to have a presence, to the point it became literally impossible to find the right information on the Web. That’s when a better generation of search engines – at first the Yahoo! and then Google – entered the market and helped us find the most relevant information by just typing simple keywords in their search box. If you had asked before Google launched, if there was a need for another search engine – most would have said no, we already have those….

    Then came Web 1.0 & 2.0 – Youtube, Flickr, myspace, Facebook, Twitter and countless others have turned everyday people into content producers, influencers and experts. We basically tripled down on the information overload How do you know which channels to select for deploying your social media strategy? How do you know which one is the right channel to let your fans and followers to find you, your products, and services? Most importantly, who is Joe Smith that is recommending that person, that company, that product?

    I hope my awesomize.me can accomplish such a mission. The site is not another social networking platform. Yet the portal to all your existing social media channels. The platform helps you, your fans, your potential clients to make an intelligent decision as to which company to connect to or follow via which social media channels and why? It’s free!

    Elias
    CEO & Founder
    http://awesomize.me

    Share
  4. Great piece, and long overdue. Of course, anyone with any sense is already doing the things you recommend …

    Share
    1. True enough, Sol — but there are also plenty who aren’t, it seems.

      Share
  5. Thanks for stating the issue and addressing it with clear, tangible solutions. The biggest thing that gets me is not responding to the audience. The premise of social media is to interact with followers in an effort to build community. I guess some companies aren’t interested in engaging with and growing their audiences.

    Michael

    Share
  6. You’ve touched on a point that is indicative of the society we live in…command and control or fear and hate vs share and empower or trust and love. Somehwere along the way we lost the trust. Social media is ‘forcing’ us to rethink everything from personal communication to business models. Thank goodness!

    Share
  7. I think that most social media policies beat the purpose of getting social on the Social Web. What’s the use of social networking when you can’t talk to people? Authenticity and trust are hard to replicate online and I think brands are failing big time if they don’t allow their people to post online in a unique manner and tone that speaks of their personality, without putting the brand under fire. If I were to add one more on your tips, I would say ” Never ignore bad reviews ” – and you should deal with it… with tact and maturity.

    Share
  8. When will the newspapers get this stuff! They no longer have control, the longer they tie their staff down the harder they will find it to compete in this world of instantly available news.

    A Social Media policy should be as simple as this:

    1. Do not Tweet what you wouldn’t say to your CEO
    2. If in doubt see item 1.

    Social Media requires freedom of expression, spontaneity and character with a little bit of self restraint.

    You can’t bottle it or template it and it doesn’t come with a set of T’s & C’s, stop trying to Tame the Tiger, become one.

    Sorry, rant over.

    Sean

    Share
  9. Lauren Wiseman Thursday, May 5, 2011

    Great article!
    Here’s an example of a good social media policy:
    http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/socialmedia/

    Share
    1. Hi Lauren,

      Thank you for offering a case study of the effectiveness social media policy can have. I think there is a balance and that some regulation is essential for social media if it is to become sustainable.

      Michael

      Share
  10. Don’t be Stupid is Good Advice Anytime AND informative, useful tips are Always Good.
    Thanks for a positive article I actually read completely,
    [so unlike me] :)

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post