Tactical Transparency

Interviews with Anthony Moor and Andrew Baron

I had the good fortune to attend the Ethics of Blogging workshop at the Online News Association Conference in Toronto a few weeks back.  The session was chaired by Anthony Moor, Deputy Managing Editor/Interactive for the Dallas Morning News who I interviewed last week for his views on Transparency in Journalism.  You can hear our interview here. 

Anthony had a number of great things to say about seeking truth in journalism and the laudable/difficult job people have in trying to convey accuracy when reporting stories in any media (print, TV, radio, online).  He mentioned Janet Malcom's article from the New Yorker about all journalists being con men (read a review of the article in NYTimes.com here) in the context that anytime you interview a subject there's a chance they won't react positively to what you write.  That being the case, it's still the job of the journalist to do their utmost to portray the truth of a story over and above the feelings of an interviewee.  For guidelines on how to operate as a journalist, however, he did recommend I check out the Code of Ethics from the Society of Professional Journalism.  It's a good code and recommended as a general rule for anyone who writes/reports in any fashion. 

As an interesting counterpoint to Anthony's interview, I interviewed Andrew Baron today.  Andrew is the founder of Rocketboom, a highly popular and long running (since 2004) videoblog portraying news largely in the tech world but also in other arenas as well.  In regards to being objective in his reporting, Andrew said that Rocketboom actually advocates being subjective in its reporting and stating as such.  "You can't say you're objective...it's futile.  There is no such thing as objectivity."  Andrew pointed out the his audience has stated repeatedly over the years that this transparent declaration is refreshing as they can watch the show knowing Andrew's/Rocketboom's slant on material versus wondering what any underlying motives might be involved.  Plus (and this is helpful to know), most controversies in terms of transparency/information not being disclosed goes away when the creators of a show have stated that the views of the show are their own.  You can hear our interview here.

I do have to say that both Anthony and Andrew are overtly passionate and meticulous in their work.  They also both hold journalistic integrity high in importance in terms of accuracy, etc. (Andrew/Rocketboom do thorough research/due diligence in that regard, all references to subjectivity aside).  So the question remains (and I can't answer it), what is "truth?"  How can someone report something that is utterly, objectively accurate without in some way revealing an inner opinion that could taint/affect a viewer/reader?  If true objectivity is impossible, how can one still work to achieve a standard that provides an accurate portrayal of humanity that can be shared with the rest of humanity? 

You tell me. 

BTR Interviews Today with JD Lasica and Micah Sifry

Just finished a couple of great interviews for the book. 

First off was JD Lasica of OurMedia.org and SocialMedia.biz.  I met JD at the Online News Association conference in Toronto (hear our interview here) and really appreciated his openness regarding the nature of integiry in journalism.  (He was the first person to talk about the idea of "The Cult of Transparency" in journalism).  There were a number of highlights for the talk, but I was especially appreciative that he had thought of three general buckets for transparency, which are:

• Operational Transparency; this would be posting blogging guidelines, etc. or other things companies would do as a part of any online initiative towards transparency.
• Transactional Transparency; this is the idea of disclosing things when out in the field/working towards your organization, etc.
• Lifestyle Transparency; this is the idea of posting a good "about" section for your blog so people can know about who you are/the context for what you write.

Make sure to listen to the whole interview here and thanks to JD.

Next up today was Micah L. Sifry, co-founder of the Personal Democracy Forum conference happening next May in NYC.  He is (in my opinion) the authority to go to in terms of how technology is affecting politics and had numerous fascinating examples of how people are using technology effectively to be more transparent in their campaigns/work.

For instance, George Miller uses Google Maps to describe where money is being spent via earmarks and also asks for comments via YouTube.

Long story short, technology is allowing us to keep government officials on their toes in terms of hearing what we have to say, since (as Sifry puts it), "they work for us."

A favorite quote from the interview in terms of how technology is finally getting used on the Hill (but wasn't in the past) from Sifry: "When you used to use the word blog in Washington, people thought you had a cold."

Listen to my interview with Micah L. Sifry here.

Confessions of an Online Troll

I'm looking for someone who would consider themselves a former troll.  And I'm not looking to vilify this person, simply understand from their viewpoint why they continued to return to one particular blog/site and post comments without using their name, etc. I seriously want to try and understand the logic behind being so diligent in this way, beyond the usual throw away reasons like, "they've got nothing better to do" or whatever.  What's your story?  Did you feel people weren't listening to you?  Did you troll for good reasons/purposes that other people should know about?  I'm not looking for a how to, mind you--I'm looking for the why.  Let me know at: johnhavens AT blogtalkradio DOT com.  Thanks.

Transparency Top Three - Phrases Not to Use

Although we applaud the effort, don't use these following phrases as a way to show people you're opening up (especially at work):

1. Guess what happened during my surgery the other day?   
2. I really open up after six beers.
3. Watching Pink Floyd's, The Wall and getting stoned is kind of redundant.

I Dig Truth - Transparency During Tragedy

I've been doing a LOT of thinking as to why the issue of transparency is so compelling to me.  There are a number of reasons, but the simplest boils down to three words: I dig truth.

So what is "truth?" Truth to me is when words are spoken or actions taken that leave no doubt those words/actions could not have been contrived.  In actor speak (I was an actor for fifteen years), you're, "living in the moment."  Typically this rawness/realness is coupled with intimacy in some fashion, but not of the physical kind.  The moment is intimate because it resonates with you--you, personally, and stops you in your tracks.  We're busy people these days, and for something to be so compelling that it causes you to halt your actions and curb your agenda is pretty powerful.

Here's three examples that stick in my mind from 9/11.  Transparency during Tragedy:

I lived in NYC during 9/11.  I worked at a church on the upper east side and at the time we didn't have a TV in the church so we got all of our notices via radio and spotty Internet reports (spotty meaning jerky video due to our slow connection). 

Obviously there were a myriad of things that affected me that day and for weeks to come.  But three  things stand out, and although not directly related to transparency in business/online, they resonate with me in regards to transparency.

*First is how many reporters that day cried or stumbled over their words. This is not meant as a criticism, by the way.  Quite the opposite.  Understanding the need to maintain professional decorum and report the news in an objective manner, I can't tell you how much I appreciated when journalists let me see the terror/horror/pathos they felt during their reports.  I didn't want a reporter-tron listing facts from the site of this devastation; I needed an FDR fireside chat, a portrait of something I understood offering comfort by the nature of the fact that they were human and mystified by the chaos (quite literally) swirling about them. 

Their behavior in this regard was transparent to me.  They were doing their best to do their jobs but at times couldn't hold back their emotion.  I found this comforting.  I found this to be real.  It wasn't contrived--they were living in the moment, and that took courage and bravery.  And I appreciated them for it.

*The second thing about the 9/11 era that reflects transparency was how open we New Yorkers were to one another.  I lived in Manhattan for a decade, so I can say with authority that you're trained early on in city living to not look at one another when you walk on the street, protect your stuff, be wary of others, etc.  Pretty standard, 'humans living close to each other in one big space' kind of stuff. 

That all went away during 9/11.  For one thing, seeing a huge plume of smoke billowing from downtown made it impossible to return to normalcy for at least three weeks.  Secondly, nobody gave a crap about anything except knowing their loved ones were alive/safe and trying to help the firefighters and rescuers at Ground Zero accomplish the goal of saving those loved ones.  I nodded to people and they nodded back and our eyes actually met.  I openly wept when walking by billboards festooned with the smiling faces of people we all knew were likely dead. 

We had our veil of urbanite complacency ripped from its hinges to expose the raw veneer of humanity that resides within all of us.  Said more simply, we were scared shitless and looked to each other for comfort.  Race didn't matter, class didn't matter.  Although utterly tragic and an event I would wish away in a heartbeat, it was also a precious and beautiful era where NYC and the U.S. came together and took care of each other.

*The final thing about 9/11 and transparency that sticks out in my mind was how many people starting talking about religion and faith issues more openly.  Granted, I worked at a church, but I think that gave me a better perspective on realizing how many people were receptive to discuss issues of life and death when they had the potential of an immediate afterlife so clearly staring them in the face.   

I don't mean to prosletyze my Christianity here, by the way--I'm simply stating a fact.  I've never experienced a time in my life when people were so open to hearing about Jesus or eternal life without a pall of skepticism or rushed disinterest keeping them from even considering spiritual issues. 

That was transparent to me.  People really searching for answers that weren't reliant on money or career.  Or even family.  People asking big questions and wishing for healing answers. 

I Dig Truth

These examples are extreme, but should demonstrate my point.  When is the veil lifted in your life or work?  When do you get to experience your true nature in all its grime and glory? 

Still figuring it out, but transparency is a key to all of this. 

Ethics in Blogging Workshop at BlogWorldExpo

I'm currently sitting in a session at BlogWorldExpo moderated by Amy Gahran from Contentious.com. 

Interesting information about Astroturfing which I first heard about via the New PR Wiki.

Other issues that came up during the session:

-Idea that there could be a central place online to list journalistic/other code of ethics. -Idea that bloggers need to move past the mentality that they can write about anything without backing up their facts. -Idea that there might be an organization that bloggers could join to state their standards. -Business Marketing: WOMMA has a code of ethics. 
-The Media Blogger's Association (Bob Cox runs this).  Working to help bloggers get insurance (folks from non mainstream media) to help protect libel laws.
-Ethic: Don't be lazy (from the panel).
-Lynne from Fast Company: talked about Wikipedia and someone who had asked to have a comment deleted. At first she wasn't going to do it as this is her personal blog, but after considering the person's request she may either take it down or add some of the other person's thoughts as a way of registering that person's concern.
-Another panelist talked about the need for privacy for people whose words/images you use.  If they ask to take things down, you should take things down.
-Question from the audience: Should people do "fictional" blogs or are these fake blogs?  Tris Hussey coined the term, "character blog." 
-Military/soldier blogs: soldiers will often post with a pseudonym. 
-Panelists talked about Tim O'Reilly's Code of Ethics and other codes of ethics like these here:  (www.bloggingcode.org) and (yourcodeofethics.com).
-Free speech in peril in Paris, Texas.  Blogger being sued.
-Barbara Hickey case brought up.
-Electronic Frontier Organization is something to join as a blogger.
-Question of user experience versus blogger ethics; when you say, "this is fiction" or provide full disclosure, when does that ruin the reader experience?
-Issue of when ethics and law collide: copyright law.
-Federated Media; discussion on marketers paying for chats as well as blog posts.

Stephanie Rogers of PARTNERS + Simons

I spoke with Stephanie Rogers today about transparency.  She is the Director of Interactive Strategy at PARTNERS + Simons and was extremely helpful in providing specific, pragmatic ways to help clients understand the need for transparency in their communications.  We recorded the interview via BlogTalkRadio and you can hear it here:

Interview with Stephanie Rogers of PARTNERS + Simons regarding Transparency.

Some of the pragmatic initiatives she mentioned involved creating a corporate blogging policy for a company, along with a code of conduct.  I've heard of other folks using the blogging policy (rules for employees; what they can/can't blog about, netiquette, etc.) but the code of conduct was a newish idea for me.  Stephanie's point for creating this was that you could post this code of conduct (a call to act in a civil manner, no abusive/harsh language) and if people transgressed it, you had fair reason to yank their posting privileges. 

In terms of good case studies, re: transparency, Stephanie mentioned Homegoods.com and how she had helped train five new bloggers (folks who hadn't blogged before).  Over 20,000 people had tried to get these five slots, and Homegoods inspires huge brand loyalty.  These "passionistas" point out the value of letting your customers speak for you/your brand when you give them an avenue to do so. 

Thanks to Stephanie for a great interview and I highly recommend her/her firm for great ideas on how to successfully build/market your brand.  Her personal site, The Culture Junkie, is also a great read and provides more insights into marketing from a more personal point of view.

-John C. Havens