Modul Mata Kuliah Journalisme Online - Ayo Menulis FISIP UAJY

Frequently Asked Questions:
How do you decide what to link to in the work you publish online?
We start by asking the questions listed in the publishing protocol above. The linking decision requires
more specific considerations, including the relevance and reliability of the material that might be linked.
The decision to link or not -- especially to controversial content that the audience could find on its own -
- creates an opportunity for explanation and discussion. Linking decisions should be based on serving the
audience with as accurate and as complete a picture of the world as possible. Such decisions should not
be limited by commercial concerns about sending customers to others' sites.
When is it appropriate to publish material that has not been reviewed or edited?
Decisions about when to edit -- and how much -- are best made along a risk/benefit scale that includes
such considerations as the nature of the information, the relative importance of speed versus accuracy,
the relative importance of quantity vs. quality of the material to be published, the availability of
resources, and the skill, experience and track record of the person producing the content. Just as live
shots increased the likelihood of unedited content appearing on television news broadcasts, various
digital formats now emerging will create platforms for content subjected to a range of editing - from
none to rigorous. Whatever level of editing is applied, the variety of new platforms underscores how
important it is for publishers to communicate clearly just what level of editing has been applied.
Why would you ever allow people to publish something without their real identity attached to what
they say?
There are times when withholding the full name of an author could serve a useful purpose. A news
organization might publish unsigned editorials in an effort to express a view meant to represent that of
an entire editorial board. A civil servant adding a comment to a blog might sign only as Ticked Off in
Tallahassee in order to add useful information to a political debate without jeopardizing his or her job.
Even more significant is the need to provide protected anonymity to whistle blowers whose information
can be independently verified. For the most part, though, it's difficult to make the case that the
credibility of anonymous content can ever match that of material whose author is known. As journalists,
our default position is to publish material only with full names attached. We make exceptions only in
rare cases, only for compelling reasons, and only with explanations attached explaining the reason for
the anonymity. (2/5/07 update: There is significant disagreement among participants about the topic
of anonymity, including sharp disagreement with the paragraph above. See, in particular, Steve
Yelvington's thoughtful essay on anonymity in a recent issue of Nieman Reports. We hope revisions to
the accompanying Wiki will reflect additional perspectives on the issue.)
How do you decide when a user should be banned from publishing on your site?
This question raises a fundamental tension for journalists working in digital media: the need for a news
organization to accommodate conflicting views at the same time it creates and maintains a community