Archive for the ‘Social Media’ Category


BRANDED: How young journos can make a name for themselves

Let’s be honest, I’m not great at branding myself in the journalism world, and if we run the stats I am probably not qualified to write a post about it. But, I am really good at regurgitating other people’s thoughts, so I went to someone with more experience, credentials, knowledge and really just someone who knows a lot more about branding than me — Robin J. Phillips.

Robin J Phillips

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Robin J. Phillips

My Twitter followers: 356 (mostly pity follows)

Robin’s Twitter followers: 3,736 (probably all legitimate) 

I had the opportunity to talk with her at Excellence in Journalism 2014 in Nashville, when she was a speaker for the Branding for Journalists breakout session. Phillips just so happens to be the digital director for the Reynolds Center for Business Journalism and a journalism professor at the Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University, so who more fitting to give all of us up-and-coming journos a branding lesson than Ms. Journo Branding herself?

Want more tips, tricks and advice on breaking into journalism as a young journo? Join SPJ’s  #youngjournojobs Twitter chat at 2 p.m. ET on Sept. 30 with Kenna Griffin, assistant professor of Mass Communications at Oklahoma City University. In the meantime, check out her awesome website with loads of young journo helpful tools.

Now back to branding with Phillips:

Q: What are the top five things a young journalist who is trying to brand themselves must do?

  1. Get your own domain name. Register a Dot Com name that is as close to your real name as you can get.
  2. Even if you aren’t working as a journalist yet, get moving. Create a blog on a topic you’re passionate about and be creative. While you’re waiting to work as a journalist, be a journalist – write, report, take photos, make videos, show what you can do.
  3. Join journalism organizations where you can find training and begin to network with other journalists: There is a group or two for everyone like SPJ, NAHJ, NABJ, AAJA, NLGJA, NAJA, AWSM, JAWS, RTDNA, ONA, #wjchat.  If you don’t know what those are, go look them up, follow them on Twitter.
  4. Spend time every once in a while taking a look at the bios you have for all the social and online platforms you belong to. If you joined Polyvore or Pinterest as a kid and haven’t been back in a while, take a look at the photo and bio you have there and update them. You don’t necessarily want to kill the under-used sites, but it’s a good idea to make sure that if someone finds you there, they are seeing what you want them to see.
  5. Have fun. Social media and sharing things on the web is all about relationships. It’s time-consuming, but should not be a big chore. If you’re having fun – in a healthy, safe, professional way – then people will pick up on that and want to “hang out” with you.

Q: What is the worst mistake you see young journalists make in the name of branding? 

Trying to be something you aren’t. It’s important to be yourself. Figure out who you are, what you want to do and keep that in mind.  Life is too short to pretend you’re something else. That doesn’t mean you should stay the same always. Figure out your goals and make sure that everything you do to present yourself in a professional way is consistent with those goals.

For example, if you want to be an investigative reporter specializing in healthcare (could happen!), then follow healthcare reporters on Twitter and Facebook. Read everything you can about your subject and share the good stuff. Comment once in a while about what you are reading or watching – your opinion is as valid as anyone else’s about what is good and interesting.

Q: What are three incorrect stereotypes about journalist’s branding themselves?

  • People sometimes think Branding is being fake. See my answer above. Don’t be fake. Branding is actually being very real – true to yourself and true to others.
  • Some journalists think Branding is a sell-out and that your work should stand for itself.  Not true. There is too much news and information out there these days.  It’s OK for you to give your work a little push. Share it.
  • Journalists, who often are basically shy, can be critical about Branding because it feels like bragging. So what’s the matter with that? You don’t want to be obnoxious, but if you’ve done something new, interesting, smart, go ahead and blow your own horn. If you don’t tell people (prospective employers, for example), they may never know. That doesn’t mean Tweet each story you write 5 times a day. Just like any other relationship, share your successes, but don’t be obnoxious.

Q: What phone app can you not live without? 

Flickr. I love photos. My camera – HTC One – has a great camera so I take a lot of photos. I try to quickly kill the poor ones and upload high-resolution versions of the good ones to Flickr where I can keep them for later or share them with family and friends.

Q: If you could only use one social media outlet to brand yourself as a journalist, what would you choose and why?

It’s got to be Twitter. Twitter is great for journalists because it is so easy to find people interested in the same topics you are. A local journalist might have more luck on Facebook, but that gets too mixed up with personal and professional contacts. Twitter is a good place to establish your voice.

Q: If a young journalist was trying to better their personal brand and could only revamp three things, what would you suggest they focus on?

  • Review your bios.
  • Think hard about your true goals – what do you want to do, how to you want to spend your time.
  • Then start to think of yourself as a professional. Social media can feel personal and intimate, but don’t lose site of the fact that you are representing yourself as a young professional at all times. That gives you both power and responsibility. Use them wisely.

Q: Who are some examples of good journalists who are great at branding themselves?

Sarah Lane

Andrew Nusca

Afrah Nasser

Marcia Pledger

Carmen Drahl

Sonari R Glinton

Ivan Moreno

Personal Branding for Journalists slides in full.

Q: Do you think branding has become a completely digital game, or are there still tangible techniques outside of the online sphere young journos should be aware of?

Oh, in-person, real-life friendships and contacts are invaluable. After all, that’s what life is about. As you establish yourself in your field, you’ll find that relationships you make online go only so far. If you find a source online, you need to treat that person with suspicion, perhaps not quoting them at all until you’ve met in person, and certainly until you’ve talked on the phone. As far as friends and mentors and colleagues you meet online, you’ll find that you get a lot out of relationships that are only digital. But, when possible, turn those into real-life relationships.

Attend journalism conventions when you can and set up in-person meetings. If you’re on vacation to a new city, ask an online connection to meet for coffee or see if you can stop by their office. You’ll both know a lot more about each other because you’ve been following each other online. Go the local journalism organization’s meet-ups. Or organize one yourself. I once had a dozen people meet in a local bar to “attend” #wjchat on a Wednesday night. We were talking to people around the world on Twitter, but it was fun to be with ‘real’ local folks at the same time. This goes back to No. 5 above.  Sometimes it’s just more FUN in real life.

Taylor Carlier Headshot

Taylor Carlier. Photo credit: Matt Thomas

Taylor Carlier is the communications coordinator at the Society of Professional Journalists. She is a 2014 Purdue University graduate of Mass Communication: Journalism and previously was the special projects editor at The Exponent. She can be reached at tcarlier@spj.org or interact on Twitter: @Taylorcarlier.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Notes on the news, Twitter and public hunger for accuracy

There was a lot of bad.

The bombings — tragic.
A city gripped by fearful uncertainty — terrible.
News media spewing inaccurate information — beyond disappointing.

Much has already been said about the journalism mistakes: the impact on the industry, the misuse of social media and what to consider the next time big news breaks.

Among those valuable takeaways, it’s important to highlight news consumers’ reactions to media blunders.

More than ever, they’re not having it.

That’s my unscientific observation. In my year with SPJ, I’ve monitored the social media reactions to the SCOTUS ruling on the Affordable Care Act, the theater shooting in Aurora, Colo., damage caused by superstorm Sandy, the Newtown, Conn., school shooting and now the Boston Marathon bombings and the manhunt that followed. (There was the U.S. Presidential election, but that went smoothly. Did I miss anything? Probably.)

As big breaking-news events occurred, news consumers became increasingly intolerant of inaccurate reporting. Via Twitter, Facebook and Reddit, they ask for verification and urge news deliverers to exercise patience and ethical judgements.

Setting aside the inaccuracies churned out on those same platforms, it’s wonderful to see a hunger for quality journalism. Plenty of journalists got it right, but the ones that didn’t must take note of their audiences’ reactions. People want — they demand — informative, accurate reports.

Give the people what they want.

___

FYI, the SPJ Code of Ethics is a great reference » http://spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Christine DiGangi is the communications coordinator at SPJ headquarters. She graduated from DePauw University and has worked in journalism and communications. Connect with Christine through email, cdigangi@spj.org, or Twitter,@cdigang.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Chat tonight: Manti Te’o and journalism’s history with hoaxes

Failure. Disappointing. Sloppy. People had a lot to say about the role of journalism in the Manti Te’o girlfriend hoax, and much of the commentary assailed the media.

The criticism has merit, but in the weeks since the scandal unfolded, the more bizarre and complex the details have become. The media cannot be wholly blamed for or excused from the mishap, and all that mess is meaningful to journalism and its mission to report the truth.

Instead of compiling an expert-laden media analysis, SPJ wants to talk to you about it. An issue of this magnitude deserves wide discussion, which is why SPJ will participate in tonight’s #muckedup chat about the media’s tangled history with hoaxes.

Join us tonight at 8 EST for the chat hosted by Adam Popescu (@adampopescu) for Muck Rack. The more SPJ members we can include in this conversation, the better — the topic means a lot to the growth of journalism.

Follow the #muckedup hashtag to participate, and we (@spj_tweets) will see you there.

 

Christine DiGangi is the communications coordinator at SPJ headquarters. She graduated from DePauw University and has worked in journalism and communications. Connect with Christine through email, cdigangi@spj.org, or Twitter, @cdigang.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Nov. 6: A journalism case study

On Election Day, I sat as a spectator in the arena of journalism, eager to watch unprecedented news coverage unfold. “The first social election,” some called it.

I knew I wouldn’t catch everything, and I certainly didn’t, but my goal on Nov. 6 was to document the election from journalists’ perspectives. My observations are just that — trends I saw among hours of online coverage, which I consumed from one tiny computer monitor with one set of eyes. Given my resources, there’s nothing scientific in my analysis. Nonetheless, I think it has value.

My method: Monitor journalists’ and news outlets’ Twitter feeds, Facebook posts and Instagram activity; check related RSS feeds; repeatedly expand the sample size by exploring others’ Twitter lists, seeking impressionable accounts through Topsy and Hashtracking and browsing news sites to identify election reporters; finally, Storify as much as possible.

After less than an hour of this, I formed four sections within SPJ’s Storify “Journalists on Election Day”: “resources and tips,” “status updates,” “election coverage” and “just for fun.” Nearly everything I collected fit one of these categories, though some could have gone in more than one. It’s amazing what people can fit into a post of 140 or fewer characters.

Twitter was my most plentiful resource. I collected information from more than 180 accounts and learned a lot from the posts I read.

On perhaps the greatest day for civic duty in the U.S., journalists provided a variety of public services. They posted photos of polling places, sent updates of wait times in voting lines, posted links to voting resources and giving citizens multiple ways to access election results. I saw a great effort from journalists to communicate with their audiences.

In terms of election coverage, journalism impressively embraced interactive graphics and (gasp) math. In the four newsrooms I’ve worked, in the scores of conversations I’ve had with reporters, I’ve heard few kind words for math. (And I majored in English writing, so I’m guilty of cringing at math, too.)

“I do words, not numbers.”

“Well, I’m bad at math, so I chose writing.”

You’ve heard it, I’ve heard it (I’ve said it), but that doesn’t mean journalists don’t understand the importance of math — there are plenty of journalists who like math, even love it. But after Election Day, its significance has never seemed clearer. I won’t rehash the commentary from dozens of articles on Nate Silver, but if the emergence of data journalism hasn’t motivated reporters and editors to prioritize data literacy, Election 2012 should.

Ethical debates have gained momentum as a result of the election and use of social media. Instagram use among journalists has great advantages in serving consumers, and it also encourages impressive citizen journalism. The New York Times boasted an impressive collection of readers’ Instagrams on Election Day, too. But the use of Instagram’s editing features and its impact on photojournalism remains a debated ethical issue.

Even ethical topics with deep history, like whether journalists should vote, sparked fervent interactions on social media. It’s more than just voting, though, as journalists frequently take to the Internet with their political commentary and opinions.

Speaking of commentary: The “just for fun” and “status updates” segments of the Storify are, at least from my perspective, highly entertaining. Among the more serious messages like those urging others to vote and describing polling-place atmosphere, you can find many a funny message about caffeine, pizza and the inevitable system failures before a deadline.

As election returns poured in, I scaled back my rate of aggregation, first because this expected coverage didn’t add much value to the Storify and second because I could hardly keep up. What I noticed was an increase in care and accurate reporting from other breaking news that has emerged on Twitter (Hurricane Sandy, the SCOTUS decision on the Affordable Care Act). Perhaps this is indicative of a maturing digital media.

Despite the limits of my journo-tracking, this sample displayed many trends in breaking-news coverage, and I hope news organizations reflect on Election 2012 as they consider how to best deliver journalism amid industry and technology advances. Major news events double as learning opportunities, and journalists need to capitalize on them, specifically this one.

 

Journalists: What did you learn on Election Day? How will this year’s election coverage impact your approach to planning, reporting and editing? If you wish to weigh in, please engage with this discussion on our Facebook page, or send me an email. I may quote you in a future blog post.

Christine DiGangi is the communications coordinator at SPJ headquarters. She graduated from DePauw University and has worked in journalism and communications. Connect with Christine through email, cdigangi@spj.org, or Twitter, @cdigang.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Messy SCOTUS coverage is damaging for media

Today, I am disappointed in journalism.

Not everyone botched the announcement of the Supreme Court’s Affordable Care Act ruling, but plenty of trusted media outlets did a disservice to their audiences by prioritizing speed instead of accuracy.

Like half a million others, I turned to SCOTUSblog at 10 a.m. today, toggling between that and my Twitter feed. At 10:08, the explosion began: The Associated Press said the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act. CNN said it was ruled unconstitutional. The Daily Beast said it was struck down at 10:08 but retweeted The AP at 10:09. Confused, I went back to SCOTUSblog to read their measured reports.

twitter feed

My Twitter feed in the seconds following the ruling announcement.

From the SPJ Code of Ethics: “Journalists should test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error.”

Many of the erroneous tweets and headlines have disappeared from their primary sources, though those blunders live on, thanks to screen shots and the copy-paste function. But the confusion was costly from a future credibility standpoint. The networks and publications that got it right should take note of the ridicule and criticism raining down on their Twitter-happy peers.

Most of my frustration came from seeing the incorrect reports retweeted. As the minutes after the announcement passed, I continued to read posts of misguided happiness and anger, all because a friend of a follower of a follower of a news organization perpetuated the seemingly reliable information.

(Jeff Sonderman of Poynter has a good roundup of and reaction to the inaccurate reports/tweets.)

The social media response to the blunders proves that people would rather get correct information as it becomes available, rather than quickly receive an imperfect report. The point of engaging with a news outlet is to stay informed.

I don’t want to have to congratulate the journalists who waited to verify the ruling to publish the result. They just did their jobs correctly, which I expect of them. I am disappointed that this expectation was not met by others.

The winner in this brawl to break news is SCOTUSblog — it’s a non-traditional outlet started by law professionals, and they presented reliable coverage of the complicated ruling. By 10:22, they had 866,000 people tracking their live blog.

But for the millions who referenced Twitter, breaking news alerts, live TV and 24-hour-news-cycle websites, the day was one of defeat. Regardless of one’s opinion on the legislation, news consumers were exposed to a slew of unreliable reports before being corrected.

I hope health care isn’t the only industry that sees reform after today’s ruling.

Christine DiGangi is the communications coordinator at SPJ headquarters. She graduated from DePauw University and has worked in journalism and communications. Connect with Christine through email, cdigangi@spj.org, or Twitter, @cdigang.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Social Media Weekend: A worthwhile venture – and hashtag

@scottleadingham

What’s the power of a Twitter hashtag?

It can inform and help us see revolution literally before our eyes (e.g. #Jan25 for the Egyptian revolution). It can curate the angst, joy, jeers and cheers of a nation (e.g. #SOTU for the State of the Union). It can bring together a professional community for sharing and learning (e.g. #wjchat for the weekly Web journalism chat).

As I recently found, it can also change your mind for the better.

Columbia Journalism School’s Continuing Education office hosted its second Social Media Weekend Jan. 27-29 in New York. Perhaps you ran across the hashtag #smwknd in your weekend Twitter usage.

It’s an obscure hashtag on the surface. But as hashtag best practices go, it’s incredibly well conceived – short, to the point, reflective of the event’s name and content.

I came across #smwknd at this time last year, when the first conference happened. It was in a tweet from Columbia journalism professor and dean of student affairs Sree Sreenivasan that caught my eye. Sree is to social media training and modern digital journalism education as chickpeas are to hummus: the most essential ingredient. (If you don’t keep up with Sree on Twitter, you should. Like right now. Click here. Now.)

Unfortunately I couldn’t attend in 2011. But I’ll admit I was skeptical at the time whether a full weekend conference on social media would hold my attention. That’s not to suggest I felt in early 2011 – nor do I now – that I know everything there is to know about social media. Quite the opposite. I still struggle sometimes to explain to friends and family the full value of social media in their lives and its connection to journalism.

But even early last year I had seen enough program proposals, conference panels, webinar descriptions, etc. on social media to think the content and quality of social media education had reached a zenith.

However, knowing that Columbia produces some of the best and most digitally savvy journalists and media professionals, I figured it would be a worthwhile venture. It was.

(Plus it gave me an excuse to visit a good friend in New York, David Hoang, who in 2008 put me in front of a computer and literally forced me to join Twitter. “Everyone in journalism needs to be on here,” David told me. He’s a Web designer and artist.)

Below are thoughts on what I learned from Social Media Weekend. I’m sure the experience was different for each person, and what’s true for the journalism industry geek isn’t necessarily true for the marketing professional or technology reporter.

(I won’t duplicate the very comprehensive efforts of conference organizers and Columbia j-students to summarize and curate content from the weekend. See all that, including useful Storify roundups by Mohammed Ademo, at the Social Media Weekend site.)

1) Updates in social media – particularly Twitter – are brief moments in time and history. Make the time count.

I’ve long tried to avoid back-and-forth Twitter conversation that read like a drawn-out text message exchange. There is, after all, a direct message feature for a reason.

However, I’ve had to reconcile that with the notion that social media are, well, social for a reason. The idea that Twitter is conversational and therefore different than a top-down we report/you read approach is one I embrace. Indeed, community engagement is important for a reason, and one way people are engaged is by active participation and response. So, the philosophy for my own usage and for @spj_tweets is Goldilocks-esque: Engage with a few back-and-forth tweets, but not too many. Take it elsewhere (direct messages, email, phone call) if you need deeper conversation.

I still think that’s a worthwhile approach. However, something Sree said was illuminating:

 

There are all kinds of Twitter users, from comedians who tweet one-liners like it’s their job to those who spend Sundays ranting, almost obsessively, about a certain Denver Broncos quarterback.

All contribute to the ever-expanding index of digital information tracked by Google and, with Twitter, the Library of Congress. This isn’t to say that every tweet should wax poetic on the philosophy of the human condition. But as Sree points out: Social media updates only reach a small amount of those with whom we’re connected, yet they’ll live on in the annals of digital history – accessible, memorable, researchable. Would you rather have your social media footprint lead others to believe you helped spread knowledge and information – or that you hated a guy named Tim Tebow for some unknown reason?

 

2) Not everyone at your news outlet or non-profit or business needs to actively use social media for professional purposes. But everyone should be trained, encouraged and empowered to do so.

Part of this thinking stems from a session titled “Social Media & Social Good: What the Best Nonprofits and Social Enterprises Can Teach Us.” Former journalist Jim Rosenberg, head of online communications and social media for the World Bank, made a good point:

I could go on incessantly about why all journalists need to use Twitter, no matter their position, beat, etc.

But the larger point is this: If an organization (and I use the term broadly to include news outlets, businesses, non-profit orgs, etc.) uses social media, all employees need to know the essentials: Why, how and for what end?

This isn’t to say all employees need to have the keys to your company’s Twitter account. No, absolutely not. However, everyone should be aware and knowledgeable of why and how you use social media to achieve your desired ends, whether they are gathering and reporting public-interest journalism or marketing your social good non-profit.

Benefits of this:

– You have a “line of succession” of people who know how to use social media within the confines of your organization’s standards. If only one person contributes to social media and that person suddenly leaves or is unavailable, who will take over? Large journalistic institutions to small business startups should have a plan.

– Other people are encouraged to contribute to the operation of the organization and bring fresh perspectives on how to use social media.

– People learn to appreciate the work of the “social media editor” or “community engagement director” or other communications-related role as an integral part of what the organization does. How many people in your organization still inaccurately think a social media editor “just gets paid to use Twitter all day”? There’s an easy way to change that: Show people why that’s not true, and encourage them to see why by testing the value of social media for their own positions and professional development.

 

3) Whatever you’ve already learned (about social media or any job skill) it’s not enough.

And in most cases, the best way to learn more is to interact and engage with other people who know more than you and/or challenge your viewpoints. Conferences are good places to do that.

Another place to do that is through the very medium – in this case Twitter – in which you’re hoping to improve.

 

There’s no magic number of Twitter followers to following radio, and it does seem impractical that The York Times would follow the same amount or more than the 4.3 million (as of this writing) people/accounts following it. (Note: I hesitate in writing the term “follow,” as I’ve written before about why it’s wise to avoid it.)

But Sree’s point, one with which I agree, is well taken: There is a near bottomless pool of insight, resources and education floating in social media. (And there is admittedly a lot of useless noise, of course.) You will benefit from continually seeking out, learning from and interacting with those who offer diverse points of view.

So, was Social Media Weekend time well spent? Yes, absolutely. Should you consider attending this event (or others) in the future? I’d recommend it, which is something I can only do having experienced it in person:

Scott Leadingham is editor of Quill magazine. If you’re so inclined, you can join him in discussing, sharing and commenting on journalism and media issues on Twitter: @scottleadingham.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

HOORAY FOR US! SPJ reached 9,000 Twitter ‘followers’! (Why we or you shouldn’t care)

Yesterday SPJ reached 9,000 “followers” on Twitter. (And there’s a reason “followers” is in quotes. Hang on for that.)

A nice amount, sure, considering it’s roughly the number of members SPJ had for much of the past 10 years. (Membership is closer to 8,000 now.)

It’s also, as it happens, completely arbitrary. I don’t care about it, and it’s kind of my job to care.

Don’t get me wrong: SPJ is always striving to broaden its audience in all media – whether that audience is composed of members, other journalists, or just interested citizens and organizations. And, of course, we do hope people will continually seek information and training from SPJ – through Twitter or whatever means.

But focusing on pure numbers is odd, distracting and silly. It’s a fool’s errand to use “follower” and “like” counts as true metrics of an organization’s (news outlet or otherwise) reach, influence or value. Klout score be damned.

I admit to writing a somewhat snarky tweet to mark our 9,000th “follower”:

The intended lesson was twofold:

1) An obsession with attracting more “followers” (and related verbiage for Facebook and other social platforms) is overblown and overdone – by news outlets and individuals.

2) “Followers” is a condescending, obtuse term (unfortunately the default word used by Twitter).

The subsequent tweet (less snarky, I hope) was this:

 

The link in that tweet led to a December 2010 post titled “Can you really engage a community by telling them to ‘follow’ and ‘like’ you?”

A set-up question, for sure. The presupposed answer: No, absolutely not.

If SPJ had an official social media policy, that would be it. (Along with the simple yet critical “Don’t be stupid” advice others have recommended as the guiding light for social media usage at news organizations.)

If not our official policy, it’s a cornerstone philosophy.

Also a part of that philosophy: Don’t use social media “engagement” in a veiled attempt to boost your counts on Twitter, Facebook or the like.

I won’t drag anyone or any outlet through the mud, but you’ve likely seen the appeals. Something to the tune of: “PLEASE HELP US REACH 10,000 FOLLOWERS. WE’RE ALMOST THERE! AND DON’T FORGET TO ‘LIKE’ US ON FACEBOOK.”

Two observations:
1) Preach to the choir much?

2) Get over yourself.

Take a moment to answer this: If you beg people to interact with or pay attention to you, is that an even relationship? Have you truly built a community?

Without an engaged community, how much value does your message really have?

Answer: Zero.

Now that’s a number you should take to heart.

Note: Thanks to Joe Skeel and Abby Henkel for input on this post.

Scott Leadingham is editor of SPJ’s Quill magazine. Interact with him on Twitter: @scottleadingham.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Why journalists (and everyone) should click the link before they tweet

Do a web search for “social media tips” are you’ll likely get way more hits from self-described “social media experts” (or “gurus”) than you ever thought possible.

I am neither an expert nor a guru, but sometimes people ask for a few tips on using social media, particularly Twitter. One rule I always say for myself that I encourage others, especially journalists, follow: Don’t retweet a link without clicking it first and seeing what’s there.

It can be tempting to pass along the information quickly, even from a trusted news source. But I wouldn’t email a URL to a friend without reading the article first. And I doubt my grandma, long known for clipping and sending newspaper articles to her family, would be that sloppy.

This example isn’t earth shattering and didn’t cause a scandal or anything of the sort. But it is illustrative of the point.

If you have a newsroom or personal policy about this, or another social media topic, please let us know in the comments.

Scott Leadingham is editor of SPJ’s Quill magazine. On Twitter: @scottleadingham

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrPin on PinterestShare on Reddit

Connect

Twitter Facebook Google Plus RSS Instagram Pinterest Pinterest LinkedIn


© Society of Professional Journalists. All rights reserved. Legal

Society of Professional Journalists
Eugene S. Pulliam National Journalism Center, 3909 N. Meridian St., Indianapolis, IN 46208
317/927-8000 | Fax: 317/920-4789 | Contact SPJ Headquarters | Employment Opportunities | Advertise with SPJ