By Darren Gilbert

Of course, there is the argument that one can feel somewhat sorry for them. After all, social media has resulted in the creation of the race to either always be first with the news or the most relevant (read engaged) to their audience. However, to accept this fact and brush it aside would also be slightly problematic. Regardless of the platform that a journalist uses, ethical standards still need to be maintained.

But what are they? And how do you engage with the digital community without compromising yourself and/or the media house that you represent? The latter question is a tricky one and especially so if you take into consideration the view of Washington D.C-based journalist, Katherine Lewis. For her, there are fewer clear-cut do’s and don’ts when it comes to social media ethics for journalists. It’s a view backed up in practice by the New York Times who have declined to set a concrete social media policy because such guidelines can become outdated rather quickly. I tend to agree.

Now, that doesn’t mean that such a practice should be the norm or that a social media policy is impossible to set. One only has to take a look at the editorial code of ethics mg.co.za/page/mail-and-guardian-ethics-and-social-media-policy set up by the Mail & Guardian to see that it can work. However, to assume that what works offline will work exactly the same online can lead to other problems. Lewis backs this up: “Because of the variety of roles that journalists can play and the broad continuum of news organizations from straight reporting to pure opinion, it’s hard to write universal ethics rules.”

One such rule revolves around that of ones opinions. As the International Journalists’ Network noted in a piece on Mashable recently, the idea that journalists should only deal in facts has been replaced with the notion that “it’s acceptable to have a point of view and show some personality”. This can, of course, lead to issues such as the ones I’ve already described in the opening paragraph. However, as Niketa Patel, the social media product manager at CNNMoney said during a recent social media debate at Online News Association’s 2012 conference in San Francisco, it’s impossible to enforce this.

“We are humans, too. We do have opinions. I think as long as you’re not controversial about it, or you’re not overly trying to make a statement, then I think it’s OK … to have somewhat of an opinion,” states Patel. Poynter Insitute’s Kelly McBride, who is part of the senior faculty for ethics backs her up: “I would never want a journalist to think that he can’t fully participate in social media because he’s a journalist.” If that happens, would it not defeat the point of engaging with one’s audience on social media?

If anyone is having any reservations about this, one last point needs to be made. Opinions and analysis shouldn’t be lumped together as the same thing. As The Wall Street Journal’s social media director, Liz Heron said at the same debate, journalists are at their best when they offer analysis and context instead of a straight story. By engaging on social media platforms, journalists can provide their followers with those details that were cut from the initial story, which in turn leaves one’s audience better informed.

A second rule revolves around the question of whether you should ‘friend’ your sources. As Lewis points out, she’s ‘Liked’ pages published by her sources. I’ve done the same. Now, while there was no ambiguity around this topic in the past - you were friendly but not friends with sources – today, it’s different. Then, there were certain boundaries to uphold. Today, it’s acceptable, believes McBride, to ‘friend’ the sources that you use for a story so long as its balanced.

“[I]f you’re covering controversy over urban sprawl in your metro area, make sure to follow groups on all sides of the issue: developers, environmentalists, community groups and the relevant government representatives,” says McBride. So long as there is transparency – a third rule that dovetails the second – and a clear indication that you are not favouring one angle or opinion over another, there shouldn’t be any major issues.

What do you think? What are your thoughts on the need of social media ethics for journalists? Tell us below.