Thursday, August 3: Read the second post in this series: Don’t Plagiarize!
——————————————————————
This is the first post in a series called “How to Avoid a Blogosphere Scandal.”
The advice can apply to anyone at anytime, but the primary audience is bloggers.
In my short blogging career, I’ve discovered that the more critical and on-point you are about what’s going on in the world, the more detractors will try to dig up dirt on you, “out” you, or hunt for shortcomings, secrets, contradictions, and hypocrisy. People who don’t like you or what you have to say will always look for ways to trip you up. Don’t give them the satisfaction.
Disclosure
Most professions have rules or guidelines about disclosing conflicts or potential conflicts of interest. For example, the preamble to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics states:
The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility.
While we may question mainstream media’s truth-seeking ability or whether they truly strive to provide a “fair” account of events, I believe that in general, most journalists recognize that with a free press comes responsibility. The press serves as a check on government. Part of its duty is to make sure we the people know what’s going on. While I trust the media in theory to tell me the truth, I know that no human is truly objective. As long as I know the source of information is left-leaning, for example, I can make judgments about the fairness (or unfairness) of the coverage, even though events may be factual.
According to SPJ, “Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know.” That means reporters should disclose potential conflicts that interfere with the “right to know.” Whether or not bloggers consider themselves journalists, we should be under a similar obligation. Bloggers pride themselves on being transparent. That doesn’t mean we’re obligated to tell all our business. It means that we’re obligated to let readers know if we’re being paid to blog about a certain topic or person.
Political bloggers tend to be pretty transparent about what they believe, why they believe it, who they voted for, etc. As blogging is still a new medium, many of us are still developing our styles and niches and defining our goals and reasons for blogging.
Even though the medium is new, there are a few principles bloggers should keep in mind. For example, if you’re working for a politician and you blog about the politician, you should disclose the relationship. If I were providing content for Michael Steele’s blog for a weekly salary (which I’d like to do because his blog stinks) and I blog favorably about Steele at LBC, I would be under an ethical obligation to disclose that information to readers. Why? Keep reading.
Pat Hynes, consultant for John McCain
I found out this weekend that blogger Pat Hynes of Ankle Biting Pundits, a man I met at CPAC and like very much, is a paid consultant for John McCain, but he didn’t reveal this fact on his personal blog.
I don’t know who broke the “scandal,” but I read about it on Jim Geraghty’s National Review Online Blog. Pat defends himself in Regarding Disclosure. There’s nothing unethical about working for John McCain, but if you’re going to blog about him, readers should be privy to the relationship.
Some bloggers questioned Pat’s integrity. Whether or not the criticism is fair, failing to disclose does open us up to this kind of thing. Hiding or not revealing these sort of relationships for whatever reason can damage our credibility.
If we bloggers are going to demand transparency from the media and criticize other bloggers for failure to disclose, we must hold ourselves to the same standard. Why should we disclose financial relationships? Because people don’t want to be manipulated. If someone blogs in support of a candidate and encourages your support, imagine how manipulated you’d feel if you found out the blogger was on the candidate’s payroll. He may have been sincere in his praise and really believes the candidate is worthy, but people will wonder if the blogger’s words were his own, or if those words were paid for by a third party.
(I can’t remember how I found this Wonkette post, but it will serve as an example in another part of this series: Link to sources, especially to bloggers whose photos you download from their blogs without attribution. :x)
The Armstrong Williams Scandal
Armstrong Williams (photo from his site) learned this hard lesson last year. The Bush Administration paid him $240,000 to promote No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on TV and radio to a black audience — and encourage black journalists to do the same. Scandal erupted when someone found out about it. Williams defended himself by saying that he sincerely supported NCLB, but that was no defense.
Notwithstanding the race targeting, I didn’t like what Williams did because it was embarrassing. It made him look like a paid shill with something to hide. At the same time, I don’t begrudge the man a government contract. Just disclose that you’re on the payroll! (I offered my three cents in Armstrong Williams: The Wrong Side and An Apology That Misses The Point.)
On the Left
Is it wrong to say I care more about the integrity of conservatives than I do liberals? Well, so be it. Leftist bloggers Jerome Armstrong (MyDD) and Markos Moulitsas (Daily Kos) were on the payrolls of Democrats. Jim Geraghty drafted a helpful timeline of the unfolding scandal.
Last Things
Bloggers should disclose financial relationships with politicians and businesses they blog about. If you don’t and a blog swarm ensues, you can’t blame anyone but yourself.
Next post: How to Avoid a Blogosphere Scandal: Don’t Plagiarize!
I have a short list of topics for this series, but I’m open to a few more. What’s your advice to bloggers who want to avoid being the target of negative blog swarms?
Update: Jim Geraghty writes:
If you’re a blogger, and you’re being financially compensated by a candidate, and you have not yet disclosed this fact to your readers, send me an e-mail. Tell me your side of the story…Because, sooner or later, you’re going to get caught. If you come out now, you’ll at least get some credit for doing the right thing; if you come out and admit it because I or some other reporter have caught you, it will only get worse.
(Emphasis in original)
Update II: I would guess most bloggers are hobbyists, but all bloggers — professionals and hobbyists — should examine whether they benefit from a person or organization financially or otherwise, and whether they’ve disclosed the relationship if they blog about the person or organization. I’m looking into my own dealings to weed out and/or disclose potential conflicts. What I blog, I believe, but others can get the wrong idea…
A commenter says in a few sentences what it took me a long, drawn-out post to say:
Regardless, bloggers must realize that if they blog about things where they have a financial incentive to skew their views, those views will be met with suspicion. If a blogger aspires to gravitas, they need to think long and hard before taking the lucre…The bloggers who have the greatest respect are the ones we believe are independent.
Update III (8/1): Hugh Hewitt takes a moment away from his coverage of Israel-Hezbollah and comments on the Hynes story. Danny Glover at Beltway Blogroll does another round-up.
As a medical doctor, I am constantly reading about “clinical trials” of new drugs.
Most of this is industry-sponsored, and is disclosed. Despite this disclosure, there is ALWAYS some question of the reliability of the results.
A recent “meta analysis” of many drug studies sponsored by industry, or not, was revealing. Meta Analysis is a statistical method that combines the results of many studies, and gives more information than any single study can give. This study strongly suggested that industry sponsored studies were more “positive” to the drug than non-industry sponsored study.
Because most clinical trials are sponsored by drug companies, we just have to be cautious in interpreting results. People don’t have to be crooks to be biased.
Some suggest that the Government should sponsor all drug research because the results will be more “pure”. Not so. Government grants are renewed by people who are biased in the results they want. Getting the “wrong” results can mean your grant will not be renewed.
Look no further than Government sponsored “research” on global warming. Most is alarmist. Young climate scientists have said so - they fear presenting “contrary” results for fear of losing their funding.
Comment by Frank Zavisca — 07.31.06 @ 1:53 pm
Advice For Bloggers
La Shawn Barber has good advice for bloggers in the first installment of a series of posts on how to avoid a blog scandal — disclose, disclose, disclose! She will be writing about plagiarism next and is taking reader suggestions…
Trackback by Wizbang — 07.31.06 @ 3:24 pm
La Shawn,
Where do you stand on lobbyists who run blogs that put up articles all the time shilling for the corporate and commercial interests that their lobbying firms represent?
I’m curious on this issue.
If you look at the lobbying firms “official” website, you see that they represent Big Oil, Tobacco, Big Pharma etc.
But when you look at the blogs they run… they don’t really disclose that anywhere. Then they put articles that shill for their interest without ever disclosing they’ve received money.
This is an issue I’ve been thinking about for a while, and I’d love to hear your honest thoughts on the matter.
I’ve also seen these “corporate” bloggers invite other big names from the blogosphere to meetings with these corporate interests - then these big names go back and blog about them on THEIR blogs.
But nobody ever gets around to saying that person who spear-headed those meetings were paid by the industries that were blogged about.
Just curious as to your thoughts on this.
Mac
http://www.brownsludge.com
Let me process that and get back to you. Business and personal bloggers operate on slightly different standards. - Admin
Comment by Mac — 07.31.06 @ 3:24 pm
I have a suggestion for encouragement if character assassination occurs: Read 1 Samuel. I’m reading it now, and if I’d paid attention when I read it before, I would’ve been able to deal with the false accusations and idiocy I had to deal with in a hypocritical, leftist, blame-whitey-for-everything academic setting. 1 Samuel shows us how David was constantly harrassed and misrepresented and attacked, and how he constantly turned to God.
Comment by mj — 07.31.06 @ 4:19 pm
My favorite bloggers are guests who I seek out and invite into my day. If I discover one who is trying to slip some snake oil my way, I decommission that blogger from my bookmarks and move on.
The old rule in advertising is that you spend your money to get people to “glad mouth” you, but there is nearly never enough money to win them back if you have caused them to “bad mouth” you.
Bloggers who would try to hide “paid” interests are being too clever by half and will find that they not only lose their credibility, but that they will likely not be able to win much of it back.
So far as KOS is concerned, his site is exempt from common sense ethics because it is an artesian well of vitriol from which his minions must drink regularly in order to keep their voices strong for baying at the moon and finding conspiracy theories embedded in every fortune cookie.
Even though blogging is a new game, the concept of good character goes way back. Good character is of utmost importance and it should be.
Comment by Heliotrope — 07.31.06 @ 4:21 pm
I’ve always felt the Armstrong Williams scandal was a bit contrived. He was paid to run radio ads and each advertisement clearly stated who paid for it at the end. If I recall correctly and someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but Mr. Williams said in a FoxNews interview with Bill O’Reilly that was all he was paid for and the reports of him being paid to promote behind the scenes were not true. (Again correct me if I’m wrong. It would be good if the video of that interview is available somewhere.)
So there really was no scandal there. He ran the ads and each ad said who paid for it at the end.
It would have been better for him to say something about the ad deal anytime he spoke about NCLB, but I think much of that scandal was nothing but Liberal smoke to take him down.
Comment by Independent Conservative — 07.31.06 @ 4:48 pm
I’d have to look back at the posts and go through the links, but I think the criticism was warranted. Williams’s syndicate dropped him, and he issued an apology, so he must have believed he did something wrong.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.31.06 @ 5:15 pm
Something that I learned from my Old Man - ALWAYS assume that any particular thing that you are reading has an ulterior motive.
Even if someone doesn’t necessarily have a financial incentive, most people are so hopelessly tilted towards one position or another that ANY communication, up to and including “Hello” should be treated as immediately suspect …
Comment by Axinar — 07.31.06 @ 6:19 pm
I agree. It’s called “human nature.” We all have motives, biases, and presuppositions. But if you’re blogging about how qualified you believe a political candidate is, ethics (decency?) require you disclose that he/she is paying you if credibility means anything to you. If it doesn’t, then don’t.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.31.06 @ 6:25 pm
“So far as KOS is concerned, his site is exempt from common sense ethics because it is an artesian well of vitriol from which his minions must drink regularly in order to keep their voices strong for baying at the moon and finding conspiracy theories embedded in every fortune cookie.”
At least Kos banned those 9/11 conspiracy nuts. A few people on this site are dabbling with Duke conspiracy theories - best not to wonder to much or find the facts that support your “theory.”
Kosians can’t be all that bad if Cynthia McKinney’s (another conspiracy nut) opponent advertises on the site.
Comment by UNK — 07.31.06 @ 6:35 pm
La Shawn Barber On Blogger Integrity
La Shawn Barber herself who, IMHO, still fits firmly in the “ProAm” category because, although she is clearly a gifted writer, she also clearly has a strong sense of integrity and self-respect …
Trackback by Axinar's — 07.31.06 @ 6:42 pm
What’s the old writing maxim: Anything that can be misinterpreted will be?
Most of the blogs I read seem to have a “late-breaking, shoot-from-the-lip” kind of style that cause misinterpretations, but also cause the blogger to assume knowledge his/her audience might not have–such as employment, political or religious philosophy, or other biases.
Comment by March Hare — 07.31.06 @ 6:45 pm
“Williams’s syndicate dropped him, and he issued an apology, so he must have believed he did something wrong.”
La Shawn,
I think most of us have a little “progressive” lurking in our little brains, and that little prog can make us feel guilty even when we don’t do anything wrong (ex: political correctness).
I don’t know Armstrong’s story, but this “liberal” herding could have been working on him/us.
Regardless, bloggers must realize that if they blog about things where they have a financial incentive to skew their views, those views will be met with suspicion. If a blogger aspires to gravitas, they need to think long and hard before taking the lucre.
The bloggers who have the greatest respect are the ones we believe are independent.
Comment by moomoo — 07.31.06 @ 7:03 pm
Ms. Barber. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. You’re beautiful, because you speak the truth.
Comment by GawainsGhost — 07.31.06 @ 7:05 pm
Staying Out of Teapot Tempests
La Shawn delivers the first part of How to Avoid a Blogosphere Scandal. The simple part (at least for some): tell the truth….
Trackback by Pajamas Media — 07.31.06 @ 7:32 pm
Well, according to La Shawn Barber’s Guidlines, the Huffington Post ought to be shut down right about now.
Ariana’s in deep doo-doo because over half the bloggers and contributers on that site are being compensated by the entertainment industry.
Many of the entertainment entities, the Huffington bloggers work for, give political donations to Democratic candidates. You’ve gotta dig to find the specific amounts of money, and what candidates studios and others on the payroll have given. Ariana isn’t readily disclosing that.
She makes it seem like all her bloggers are just independent people who went begging for a voice, when in fact, they are heavily recruited.
Huffington has harassed her readers and commenters, in that anyone and everyone who’s made even a single comment on that site, gets barraged with endless spam in their email. Freebies, offers, newsletters, etc… no matter how many times I’ve tried to unsubscribe, I still have Huffington Post nonsense coming thru into my email.
I think Ariana’s gonna be the first blogger to be sued one of these days, and she has deep pockets!
Huffington Post: How NOT to run a blog!
Comment by Glamchild — 07.31.06 @ 7:56 pm
Update: La Shawn Barber offers good advice.
Pingback by Pat Hynes And The Blogger/Consultants at Blog P.I. (beta) — 07.31.06 @ 7:58 pm
LA SHAWN BARBER: How to Avoid Blogosphere Scandal.
Pingback by SmartChristian.com — 07.31.06 @ 7:59 pm
At least Kos banned those 9/11 conspiracy nuts.
True, but for a cynical reason, not for principle. They damaged the credibility of his site.
Comment by Fen — 07.31.06 @ 8:11 pm
I thought this was going to be ironic, since it seems so obvious. Also, because I can’t imagine anybody paying me for what I put on my blog.
If you’re a blogger already and somebody comes and wants to hire you because he’s read your blog, are you supposed to announce it on the blog or just quit blogging? What if it’s a “journalism” type job, like Mickey Kaus getting hired by Slate?
Comment by AST — 07.31.06 @ 9:56 pm
How to Avoid a Blogosphere Scandal: Disclose!
Interesting thoughts on bloggers manipulating their audience. And using sock puppets (this coming from me, the king of sock puppetry).
Trackback by http://crabapple.cc — 07.31.06 @ 11:41 pm
The ethics of blogging
La Shawn Barber has written part one of a series, titled, “How to Avoid a Blogosphere Scandal.” Check it out, if you’re into blogging, or ethics, or both.
Trackback by The Gleeson Bloglomerate — 08.01.06 @ 12:06 am
A La Carte (08/01)
Tuesday August 8, 2006…
Trackback by Challies Dot Com SideBlog — 08.01.06 @ 6:59 am
Daily News For August 1, 2006
Foreign Israel Approves Wider Ground Offensive Israel Says Hits 2/3 Of Hizbollah’s Heavy Missiles Hizbullah Has Only Few Launchers Left’…
Trackback by Right Wing News — 08.01.06 @ 9:07 am
Here’s another wrinkle for you. I have sometimes been attacked not for what I have said, but for what I have NOT said. I’ve also been falsely accused of being in the employ of “the Republicans” (which I am not). But let’s just suppose I was being paid by someone, a huge scandal broke, and I just ignored the scandal and wrote posts about stuff like global warming and gun control. I’m just wondering, could my silence possibly be considered scandalous, or is that too much of a stretch?
Do bloggers ever forfeit the right to remain silent?
Comment by Eric Scheie — 08.01.06 @ 9:23 am
Toward A More Ethical Blogosphere
The recent controversies surrounding Democratic blogger Jerome Armstrong and Republican blogger Patrick Hynes have sparked a bit of online soul-searching about where, if at all, to draw ethical boundaries in the blogosphere. Two Republican bloggers pos…
Trackback by Beltway Blogroll — 08.01.06 @ 9:54 am
An interesting series is on the way from LaShawn Barber guiding others on how to avoid a blogosphere scandal. (HT: Challies)
Pingback by Fill Up — 08.01.06 @ 9:58 am
The manipulative silence of manipulation
La Shawn Barber has a fascinating post titled “How to Avoid a Blogosphere Scandal.”If we bloggers are going to demand transparency from the media and criticize other bloggers for failure to disclose, we must hold ourselves to the same standard….
Trackback by Classical Values — 08.01.06 @ 10:43 am
Typical journalistic codes of ethics don’t stop with who’s paying you — that’s really, really an obvious problem. Other ethical canons say that you shouldn’t be a member of a group that you cover. Glenn Reynolds, for instance, is a member of the board of directors of the Foresight Nanotechnology Institute (and is likely paid to attend board meetings) but, while he’s occasionally mentioned that he belongs to the board, he’s never done it in the context of plugging people associated with FNI in various ways, such as Aubrey de Grey. In fact, Reynolds is remarkably coy about his belief in transhumanism (the fringe, cult-like folks who advocate freezing your head when you die and who think that sometime in the next 30-odd years everyone will turn into an immortal, robot-like being). FNI is a transhumanist organization, for instance, but Reynolds doesn’t connect the dots. What intrigues me about the blogosphere is how much people like Reynolds get away with. How much does he make from his Amazon click-throughs on all the digital toys he promotes, for instance, or on all the books he plugs? There needs to be fuller disclosure on all this stuff.
Comment by John Bruce — 08.01.06 @ 11:36 am
Still obsessed with Ariana and her tactics:
Remember when Huffington took snippets of George Clooney’s interviews, cobbled them together to make a custom “blog” for her site, then didn’t bother to disclose the fact that it wasn’t original content, until she was outed by Clooney, himself.
I have to wonder how often Ariana does that. She got caught with the George Clooney episode, but I can only imagine the hundreds of of blogs she passes off as “original content” where she hasn’t been caught yet.
There’s certainly no incentive for Ariana to play by the rules. She gained immense publicity from the whole George Clooney thing. Why not just keep doing it?, and if she’s outed every once in awhile, so much the better…more publicity and attention for her site.
Huffington is among the worst, no doubt about it!
Comment by Glamchild — 08.01.06 @ 4:58 pm
More Tuesday Tips: Avoid Blog Scandal
Go to La Shawn Barber’s Corner to read about How to Avoid Blogosphere Scandal: Disclose! Her next post in this series will be on plagiarism… BIG no-no. Good stuff.She writes on disclosure, “If we bloggers are going to demand transparency from the m…
Trackback by Deo Volente — 08.01.06 @ 7:33 pm
Truth in Reporting and Full Disclosure - MEXHEZ
I have been asked on two occasions via email now whether either myself or this information outlet (MEXHEZ) is in any way being funded by any particular political candidate or any other special interests whatsoever. In short, the answer is NO, I am no…
Trackback by Mexican Hezbollah — 08.02.06 @ 2:46 am
Submitted for Your Approval
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…
Trackback by Watcher of Weasels — 08.02.06 @ 3:21 am
“Where do you stand on lobbyists who run blogs that put up articles all the time shilling for the corporate and commercial interests that their lobbying firms represent?”
Know who you’re reading. If the blogger is a professional shill, expect that they might be shilling. As with everything, consider the source.
Comment by Pablo — 08.03.06 @ 8:48 am
The Council Has Spoken!
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… the winning entries in the Watcher’s Council vote for this week are They’re Not What You’ve Been Tol…
Trackback by Watcher of Weasels — 08.04.06 @ 2:38 am
Are You a Victim of Blogosphere Hate Crime?
A few days ago I read La Shawn’s excellent post on how to avoid a blogosphere scandal, and I was thinking about a new term that we should consider - Blogosphere Hate Crime - in fact, I am coining this
Trackback by Amazing Grace — 08.04.06 @ 7:58 pm