Twitter Titan

Right after I read this story last week in The Washington Post, I subscribed to Andy Carvin's Twitter feed.

Hours later, I unsubscribed. The guy lives up to the billing, and then some.

Carvin, a D.C.-based social media strategist for NPR, has made it his mission to provide updates on happenings in the Middle East. Given the subject matter, the result is a lot of tweets. A lot. I just couldn't keep up with him.

What's fascinating is how Carvin uses Twitter to verify information. His followers play an active role in the process. For students, "@acarvin" is worth studying not only as a potential model for how to incorporate Twitter into newsgathering, but also as an example of how to engage citizens.

It's not a perfect model, of course, as both Post writer Paul Farhi and Carvin himself observe:

"Despite the speed of delivery and breadth of material that Carvin musters every day, the form has its weaknesses. Carvin acknowledges that it’s difficult to know the full context of some of the information he transmits, such as the harrowing footage he linked to last week of a father encountering his dead and disfigured son in a hospital room. The video apparently was from Yemen, but much else — who shot it, under what circumstances and when — was hard to substantiate.

"What’s more, Carvin doesn’t speak Arabic or Farsi, which means he must rely on his followers for translations. He’s also never met about two-thirds of the hundreds of sources he uses for tips and tweets.

"Carvin candidly notes another potential pitfall: He’s far more likely to get information from rebels than from the regimes. 'The majority of people online [in the Middle East] are young, better-educated and skew toward reform,' he notes."

By way of addressing some of that, Carvin says he sticks with reliable sources and makes a point of labeling unconfirmed items. Post blogger Melissa Bell provided a glimpse into Carvin's process, which speaks to the values of verification and transparency.

While I don't plan to add "@acarvin" back into my feed, I do keep him in my saved searches so I can visit from time to time. Sa-lute!

Ultimate Example

From Japan, which continues to reel from the recent one-two punch of earthquake and tsunami, comes a stirring example of how one newspaper views its social role.

Conditions were especially dire in the days immediately after the twin disasters, yet these journalists were undaunted. A half-dozen rounded up the news. Three others wrote it out by hand on large sheets of paper. These were posted at relief centers.

The cycle was repeated for six days, until the paper could resume traditional mass production. Free copies now are provided to relief centers each day.

So here's a message to my future students: Think it's hard to put out a paper?

Really?

Think again.

Social Media Primer

The April 6 "J-Flash" from J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive Journalism contains a promo for "Likes and Tweets: Leveraging Social Media for News Sites." It's a learning module for journalists who want to explore using platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and the like.

I'm not all the way through it yet, but I think it could be a good tool - one in a series of tools - to help students navigate the beginning stages of social media use. My starting point was the section on Tumbr, a platform I considered using for this blog but decided against because I felt like I needed more knowledge on how it works. This would certainly have informed my decision.

I'm liking what I see in the section on maximizing impact, too. Journalists should understand the basics of Web analytics, tagging and such.

So far, I haven't come across anything about ethics of social media use by journalists. Luckily, I now know where to find such material.

Overthinking It?

One of our assigned readings this week outlines the social media guidelines for students in Arizona State University's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. These are based on "A Newsroom Guide for Using Social Networks" by Kelly McBride of The Poynter Institute.

Maybe I read it wrong, but one thing in ASU's version concerned me. "Aggressively manage 'friends' and followers and their comments. Delete comments that call into question your ability to act independently as a journalist and, if necessary, remove 'friends' or followers who make such comments."

McBride's version puts it differently: "Manage your friends and their comments. Delete comments and de-friend people who damage your reputation."

My concern with the "aggressive" management advised by ASU lies in interpretation. Let's face it -- the thickness of journalist skin varies widely. Some people can take a lot of criticism and even thrive on it, using it as a means to spur dialogue about the subject. Others, however, take offense at the slightest hint of negativity. So, in those cases, "aggressive" management of friends and comments could shut down valuable discussion. And it could result in accusations of censorship.

I would want my students to consider this very carefully as they craft editorial guidelines for managing website comments and social media.

Good Timing

This week I've been watching a young family member struggle with social media etiquette. Well, she hasn't exactly struggled - she's voiced her opinions loudly (in all caps at times) and clearly. Her catfight with a "friend" started with a misunderstanding and quickly escalated into an ugly, nasty exchange that went on for more than a day.

On my lunch break today, I called and preached a sermon about the lasting nature of the Internet, the likelihood that future employers might well conduct Internet searches, the potential legal issues, and so forth. My young relative, to her credit, had already been thinking about her behavior. She was contrite and resolved to take the high road in future. And she apologized for any embarrassment she might have caused adult family members.

While I could have done without this situation, it did provide me with a personal angle on we have been reading about lately concerning social media issues associated with scholastic media. My young relative did not work on a school newspaper or yearbook (more's the pity), but she told me during our phone conversation that she is mindful of the example she needs to set for the little girl she babysits.

It's highly likely, then, that my take on this week's assignment involving a guide to social and digital media for an editorial policy will touch on these points from "Online Ethical Considerations":

• We will not create personal or professional attacks in our use of social media on the people (we) report on. We will keep the personal and the professional separate.
• We agree that staff members should conduct themselves in social media forums with an eye to how their behavior or comments might appear if called upon to defend them as a news organization.

Shoe-Leather Reporter

In reading about David Broder, the veteran political writer for The Washington Post who died March 9, I found some life lessons for student journalists … well, make that journalists of all ages.

1. Do your homework and do right by your sources.

Broder’s career illustrates that the two go hand in hand. Post columnist E.J. Dionne was among those who commented on Broder’s approach to his work. “It's been said eloquently by so many others that he was a reporter's reporter – and within that, a citizen's reporter, a voter's reporter. It wasn't just that he knew every governor and every state party chair in the country – and some enormous proportion of county commissioners, state legislators and city council members, too.

“It was also that he felt compelled, constantly, to go door-to-door to talk to voters," Dionne continued. "They were subjects for Broder, not objects. He wasn't trolling for good quotes. He truly wanted to know what and how people thought and felt. He wanted to understand them.”

Jack Betts, associate editor of The Charlotte Observer, referenced Broder with the moniker reflected in the title of this blog post. Over the years, Betts “ran into Broder from time to time as he breezed through the state on the trail of one story or another, watched him question businessmen, college presidents and those who might know something he needed to know. His interviews always seemed more like conversations than interrogations.”

2. Own up to your mistakes.

"As a reporter, Mr. Broder admitted shortcomings on issues great and small," the Post's Adam Bernstein wrote. "He compiled for publication his 'annual accounting of errors and misjudgments' highlighing his bloopers in election coverage."

3. Help your colleagues.

Dionne first witnessed Broder’s bigheartedness as a 23-year-old reporter in the runup to the 1976 New Hampshire primary.

“I was then working for The New York Times and found myself in a press room, during a debate as I recall. And here was Dave Broder, one of the most famous and accomplished political reporters in the United States, bounding in after doing some reporting – he was always reporting. He just handed his notes over to a younger reporter and said, ‘Here, you can use these.’

More on Comments

After last week's rant on comments, I decided to channel my distaste constructively by taking on a comments-related assignment for the social roles class. I wrote a letter to my imaginary students designed to get them started on crafting a comments policy for their new website and Facebook page.

An e-mail this morning from The Poynter Institute about the latest Romenesko tidbits sent me to The Indianapolis Star, which is facing a judge's order to reveal the identity of those who commented anonymously about a former CEO of a nonprofit organization.

Whoa, Nellie. Along with all the other issues related to online comments, now we might have to worry about shield law implications?

Now I'm even more in favor of requiring registration for comments.