Ethical Considerations in the Development of Journalistic Guidelines for Web Use Stan Ketterer 312 Lee Hills Hall University of Missouri-Columbia School of Journalism Columbia, Mo. 65202 Phone: (314) 882-5740; (314) 474-3767 E-mail: c249198@showme.missouri.edu Prepared for presentation at the Second Annual Ethics and Technology Conference from June 6 to June 7 in Chicago. To be persuasive, we must be believable. To be believable, we must be credible. To be credible, we must be truthful. -- Edward R. Murrow Two faces of Internet technology The technology of the Internet can be both a blessing and a curse to journalists. With a few keystrokes on a computer, files from the Library of Congress or a transcript of today's presidential news conference can be brought to the desktop of journalists anywhere in the world. That information can help provide depth and breadth to stories that can help readers, listeners and viewers to better understand our complex, interrelated world. Although the technology of the Internet helps journalists get information quickly in a highly usable form, it cannot ensure its accuracy nor positively identify its authors (For some technical details see Bennett, Brassard and Ekert, 1992; Cerf, 1992; Wallach, 1992). Information can mislead readers as well as inform them, and a story containing inaccurate or misleading information that is published or broadcast has the potential to mislead millions. Misinformation can lead readers, listeners or viewers to erroneous conclusions about the news. If a newspaper, for example, continually publishes inaccurate information, readers will begin to doubt the accuracy of all of the information it publishes and its commitment to ethical standards. As a result, readers might not believe the information in stories, which can affect their assessment of the credibility of the newspaper. Ultimately, the newspaper's reputation could be damaged. Therefore, newspapers and other media outlets must establish policies that set up processes to ensure that information taken from the Internet and used in stories is not inaccurate or misleading. Journalists have an ethical obligation to themselves and to their readers, viewers or listeners to ensure the accuracy of information taken from the Internet, usually the World Wide Web. Failing to verify the accuracy of information with its source and by other means before it is disseminated can have profound consequences, as a recent news story involving former presidential press secretary and ABC News reporter Pierre Salinger illustrates. Last November Salinger, press secretary under President John F. Kennedy, unintentionally issued a wake-up call to journalists worldwide that relying on information from the Internet can be hazardous (Coates, 1996). Salinger alleged that a U.S. Navy missile downed TWA Flight 800 last July, killing the 230 people aboard (Associated Press, Nov. 8, 1996). His allegations were based on an official-looking home page on the Web that apparently contained fictitious information. After receiving a tip via an electronic mail message, Salinger said he checked it out on a home page containing an assessment by French intelligence that concluded the Navy had shot down the jetliner (Coates, 1996). Ironically, it was Salinger's credentials as a journalist that made the story believable to the mainstream press (Achenbach, 1996; Turner, 1996). "This is the only reason, indeed, that the news organizations reported what Salinger said: As a former White House press secretary and ABC News correspondent, he seemed like a credible person," Achenbach wrote. For months, the rumor had been circulating among discussion groups on the Internet, whose members had better tools to evaluate it more critically and had largely rejected it. One Netizen interviewed for a story in Newsweek (Turner, 1996) quipped: "Well, Pierre, if you'd get a little Net-savvy, you'd figure it out. Learn to surf, Dude." The allegations also alarmed the U.S. government, which was quick to rebut Salinger's accusations (Anderson, 1996; Dine, 1996; Los Angeles Times, Nov. 9, 1996). But damage control is difficult, especially with a credible source, as Hovland's early experiments on propaganda showed (Severin and Tankard, 1992). Readers also could have missed the rebuttal or after a while forgotten the source of the information, the sleeper effect (Severin and Tankard, 1992). At first the mainstream press appeared to consider Salinger the target of a cruel hoax and thus appeared to feel some sympathy for him. But they also recognized the ability of Salinger and of inaccurate information taken from the Internet to mislead the public. "So far, however, his shoot-from-the-hip brand of journalism seems only to have increased public confusion -- and cynicism about the government and the media," wrote Dickey and Hosenball in Newsweek (Nov. 25, 1996). After Salinger renewed his allegations in March and bolstered them with an assertion that a blip detected on radar was proof of his friendly-fire theory, the mainstream press' changed its treatment of him (Goodman, 1997; Rashbaum, 1997). The FBI said the blip was an unarmed Navy reconnaissance plane (Associated Press, March, 21, 1997). The mainstream press now focused editorially on Salinger's potential to do harm. For example, the headline on an editorial in the San Francisco Examiner called the allegations "Salinger's Sad Obsession" (March 16, 1997). The Rocky Mountain News (March 5, 1995) proclaimed "Salinger's recklessness" and put the situation in perspective: "Although this explanation of the crash doesn't begin to make sense, it can do untold damage, seeing as how it issued from the lips of someone who, at one point in his career, had some credibility and prominence." But the opinion section article that offered perhaps the most insight into how this episode affected journalism and how it illustrated the advantages and disadvantages of the Internet as a information source appeared in the Arizona Republic on Nov. 18, 1996, with the headline "A Tangled Web." The article noted that for all its promise and "for its potential for being an extraordinary, enriching opportunity for unlimited access and delivery of information, the Web as a source of news is a place rife with pitfalls" (Arizona Republic, 1996). Pointing out that Salinger was snagged by some "phony information, some official-looking trash," the article emphasized that "most anybody, anywhere and at any time can create an item on the Internet and make it look credible." Importantly, the article further pointed out that "online information doesn't follow standards" and "can be disseminated with a high degree of anonymity." Unlike traditional media, the article noted, "computer literates who would be publishers invest nothing of themselves -- their reputations, their capital -- into producing something too easily mistaken for `news.'" The article also pointed out that the misinformation had important repercussions, including forcing federal officials to work "overtime trying to disprove the allegations as `absolute, pure, utter nonsense.'" Noting that the information had "attached itself in a circuitous way to a famous newsman's reputation," the commentary concluded by pointing out the Internet's "dangerous potential of gaining unearned respect and credibility from millions of people." Missourian Newsroom Web Resources The remainder of this paper will deal with one attempt to harness the technology of the Web to deliver information quickly and at the same time to create a process intended to minimize potential adverse effects by establishing guidelines based on ethical principles. First, the paper will explain how the resources of the Web were tapped. Second, it will explore the ethical foundations of the guidelines for Web use that were developed. Third, it will discuss the guidelines that were adopted and how the ethical principles were applied in an attempt to avoid the dissemination of misinformation such as in the Salinger episode. Fourth, it will discuss the results of the project and offer some suggestions for future research. About the same time that Salinger's accusations were first surfacing, the researcher, a news editor at the Columbia Missourian, began "construction" of a Web site for a project at the newspaper. Staffed by faculty editors and students from the University of Missouri-Columbia, the newspaper serves a medium- sized Midwestern city. The site consisted of Web pages with hypertext links that allowed students to click on them with a mouse and be taken electronically to those Web sites. The Missourian Newsroom Web Resources site was designed to be both a tool to help student journalists mine Web resources and a means to teach them how to use them effectively and ethically. Initially the site mirrored one that the researcher developed in 1995 for use by the Missourian copy desk. The Missourian Copy Desk Reference Site contained one page with hypertext links organized mostly by geographic regions. The links allowed copy editors to quickly go directly to the information, saving valuable time. Because the links were connected to sites deemed credible by the researcher, the technology was being used to help ensure that copy editors checked facts in stories against accurate information. For instance, they could check the name of a school board member in the newspaper's electronic library or the Columbia Public School District's Web site. The site also contained a section called Internet Search, which chiefly contained links to search engines. These search engines use keywords, such as "school board" and "Columbia," to help locate Web pages containing that information. In class presentations and in newsroom discussions, students were encouraged to use the search engines as a last resort. The chief reason was that search engines could lead students to sites where the information was inaccurate or misleading. If search engines are avoided, there is less chance that such inaccurate information will be used. The year that the site was developed is a watershed in the history of the Internet, which began in the late 1960s as a means developed by the Rand Corp. to ensure the survivability of a military information network after a nuclear war (Hoffman, 1995). In 1993 there were 100 home pages on the Web; by 1996 that number had jumped to 4 million (Reddick and King, 1996); a year later it doubled to an estimated 22.7 million (McGrath, 1997). As mentioned earlier, navigation on the Web is point-and- click via hypertext links, and the ease of navigation and the graphical interface made it attractive to both consumers who were not computer experts and businesses. Responding to this increased use, government, commercial and not-for-profit sites have mushroomed. At the same time, the difficulty in assessing the accuracy of information on these sites also has been magnified. Taking this increased diversity into account, the researcher divided the resources of the Web into several useful categories. Each category contains a page of links that pertained to it. Resources on the main page were divided into these categories: City Desk Beat Reference Page; Sports Beat Reference Page; General Information; Digital Media and Online Morgues; Phone Directories; Sources, E-mail Addresses and Discussion Group Lists; Internet Search Engines; City of Columbia; Copy Desk: Editing and Design; and Internet Sites for Journalists. The heart of the Missourian Newsroom Web Resources site is the City Desk Beat Reference Page. The researcher noticed that copy editing students who were also taking reporting classes were using the Copy Desk Reference site for reporting. Consequently, it was decided that the site should be expanded to include links for each beat, i.e. area of coverage, on the city desk. Some of the beats were politics, health care, education and criminal justice. Links included the White House, the Centers for Disease Control, the National Education Association and the FBI. On the surface, the inclusion of city desk beat pages appears to be a small addition to the site. But it actually represents a major change because although copy editors primarily ensure the accuracy of information already in stories, reporters can take information from Internet sites and put it into stories. If that information is inaccurate, it can mislead readers. Thus, the technical ability to use the Web to gather information magnifies both the reporter's ability to inform the public as well as the ability to mislead it. Realizing the possible repercussions and recalling the ramifications of the Salinger incident, the researcher suggested that guidelines be drafted for the ethical use of information from the Internet and that students be taught to assess that information critically. Most newspapers and other media have general guidelines for checking the accuracy of information. At the time that the Missourian guidelines were drafted, however, the researcher was unaware of any media organization that had guidelines specifically dealing with the Internet. We now turn to an examination of the ethical and the philosophical foundations of those guidelines. The foundations Milton argued that truth was knowable and demonstrable through reason (Siebert, Peterson and Schramm, 1956). In Aeropagitica (1644), he argued that governments should generally abstain from censorship so that the truth could be discerned through the clash of ideas: "...So Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worst in a free and open encounter?" Building on Milton's foundation, Mill argued that the freedom of expression should not be limited unless it can result in harm (Siebert, Peterson and Schramm, 1956). In On Liberty (1859) Mill asserted that truth is elevated through public discussion and that no idea should be suppressed because it could be the one that holds truth. The ideas of Milton and Mill are the essence of the libertarian theory of the press. Under this theory, the press is largely free of government restrictions and its function is to inform and entertain (Siebert, Peterson and Schramm, 1956). With the press publishing a multiplicity of views, it was assumed that the public could discern the truth and discard falsehood, the "self-righting process." Applying this theory today to develop ethical guidelines for using information from the Web yields mixed results. The stipulation that information appearing in the press should do no harm is sound ethically and conforms with the views of Ross (1930) and others. But as the Salinger incident illustrates, the public's task of discerning truth is more difficult in the Information Age. Aucion (1996) argues that the audience of media messages _ readers, viewers and listeners _ also have ethical responsibilities. He lists six rules of audience ethics and two of them are especially relevant here: 1. "Demand sufficient evidence before you accept a report or story as representing a truthful account." 2. "Retain a healthy degree of skepticism even when you are willing to accept a report as truthful. No report can be the final." But it may be difficult for many audience members to assess information from Web sites because they are unfamilar with the Internet, just like Salinger. Because there are few regulations and little case law concerning the Web, nearly anyone can claim to be anyone else and it is hard to determine who is who. For example, it was very difficult in the last presidential election to determine which home page was really authored by the Dole campaign. There are no standards for publication of information on the Web. It is up to the author of each page to set standards, and many don't. Therefore, it is largely up to the users of the information from the Web site, including reporters, to apply their own standards to it when deciding what information to include in stories. But the larger issue is whether truth is "demonstrable," as Milton asserts. Hayakawa (1939) points out that a journalist's main tools, words, are symbols. When we use language to describe something, we are creating a map, which is different than the territory, i.e. the "truth" that we just observed, Hayakawa says. In making a map, truth is filtered by the prior experiences of the person observing it, he says. A reporter, for example, includes some aspects of the territory in the map, i.e. the story, and excludes others based on his or her experiences. Thus, the truth that is transmitted only resembles the truth that was observed and has been put into the perspective of the observer, in this case the reporter. When those words are read, truth is interpreted through the eyes of the reader. Readers will view truth differently because they have their own prior experiences that they use to filter it. Consequently, there is no single truth but many. If reporting absolute "truth" is impossible, perhaps the best that journalists can do is avoid telling lies. Bok (1978) defines lying as "any intentionally deceptive message that is stated." As Bok further points out, "lying requires a reason while truth-telling does not." Deaver (1990) uses a continuum to differentiate levels of truth. He defines "TRUTH" as absolute and "truth" as what we perceive as truth. The continuum ranges from "facts" on the one end to "blatant lies" on the other. As he points out, reporters generally deal in the factual end of the continuum. He defines facts as "documentable elements of truth," such as the amount of rainfall this year or the number of city council members present at a meeting. Information, Deaver says, is "a collection of related facts, organized in such a way as to convey to audiences a message that is clear and understandable, and to which they may choose to react." Then Deaver adds, "We consider information to be truthful, for perhaps we can now recognize that it is more truth than TRUTH." The latter point was the one made by Hayakawa (1939). When journalists decide what information to put in a story, they inject a certain slant, i.e. bias, because they must include some "facts" and exclude others. By being aware of this process, journalists can control the amount of slant, but they cannot eliminate it. Producers of Web pages are essentially publishers. The information on their pages is subject to the same slant as journalists in the mainstream press. Consequently, journalists must be aware of this slant and look for it when they are using information from Web pages. Deaver (1990) says journalistic "news" is closely related to information, but "traditions of reporting and newswriting inject some more precise assumptions." These assumptions include principles of "accuracy, fairness, balance and timeliness." Their intent, Deaver says is to "communicate information and only information." But the information contained in news has a slant to it, no matter how honorable the intent of the reporter. Still, as Bok points out, it is the intent not to deceive that is important and ethical journalists do not intentionally deceive. One of the primary ways that journalists can avoid lying is to check the accuracy of the information before it goes into a story. Partly in reaction to the shortcomings of the libertarian theory of the press, the Commission on the Freedom of the Press, commonly known as the Hutchens Commission, issued a report in 1947 calling for a more active and responsible press. The commission's report spawned the social responsibility theory of the press (Siebert, Peterson and Schramm, 1956), which included the principles listed by Deaver. Instead of simply reporting the news, the commission said the press had an moral obligation to make its report meaningful and to promote understanding of the community it serves. The commission listed five "ideal demands of society for the communication of news and ideas (1947)," and the first was "a truthful, comprehensive, and intelligent account of the day's events in a context which gives them meaning." Specifically, the commission said the freedom of expression does not give the press a moral right "to be deliberately or irresponsibly in error." The commission's first requirement was that the media be "accurate. They should not lie." Many of the Hutchens Commission's recommendations have been become important parts of codes of ethics for journalists. The American Association for Newspaper Editors' Statement of Principles drafted in 1975 includes this section under the heading of "Truth and Accuracy:" Good faith with the reader is the foundation of good journalism. Every effort must be made to assure that the news content is accurate, free from bias and in context, and that all sides are presented fairly (Baran and Davis, 1995). The Missourian adheres to these principles and takes them a step further. In order to ensure accuracy, the paper has a written accuracy check policy that requires reporters to re-verify the information in their stories with sources (Kennedy, 1994) by reading the story to them. The policy reinforces the newspaper's commitment to high journalistic standards and helps uphold its credibility. As pointed out earlier, trying to ensure the accuracy of information on the Internet is a difficult task for anyone, including reporters. The same technology that makes it easy to get information can also conceal the identity of its authors, making such accuracy checks difficult. But if journalism educators are going to teach students the important skill of how to use the Web to gather information for stories, they have an ethical obligation to teach them how to evaluate the accuracy of that information. Ensuring the accuracy of information helps ensure that stories will not mislead the readers and do no harm. As Morrow pointed out, for stories to be believable to the audience, they must be accurate. Believability, in turn, is the foundation of whether the audience perceives a newspaper to be credible. And the perceived credibility of a publication is the foundation of its reputation, its lifeblood. Merrill (1996) discussed the hazards of using information from the Internet in a speech to Korean journalists and educators titled "Dangerous Road Ahead: Ethical Potholes in the Information Highway." In the speech, Merrill (1996) urged journalists to act responsibly and ethically when using information from cyberspace. He listed several core principles for ethical journalism: being truthful (including being accurate), being credible (including having a good reputation), being thorough, being neutral or dispassionate, being serious and unsensational, and being fair. But Merrill zeroed in on the one he considered most important: "The key principle in all of these, I think, is credibility. All journalists want to be believed. If news is not credible, then the whole structure of journalism falls down." The Missourian Guidelines The core principles of the ethical guidelines adopted by the Missourian editors were to ensure that reporters avoided lying by verifying the accuracy of information and thus doing no harm. Although it was anticipated that most information from the Web would be used for background or as a basis for reporters to asking questions during subsequent interviews, it was acknowledged that some information would be included in stories. The editors wanted to set up an institutional process that would help ensure these principles were carried out. They hoped that this process would minimize the use of inaccurate information taken from Web sites and used in stories while at the same time help reporters learn how to use the Web resources effectively. Editors agreed that in general, reporters should assess the accuracy and credibility of information on the Web according to the same journalistic standards that they would use to assess the accuracy and credibility of any information. They also agreed that in most cases reporters should verify the accuracy of the information on Web pages by contacting officials of the organization responsible for the site and questioning them about it. In addition, they agreed that most information should be attributed so that the audience could assess the information based on its source. Specifically, they agreed that information should be attributed to the Web page if time is short and the reporter is unable to contact the organization. And they stipulated that no information from a Web page, especially that contained on personal home pages, could be used in a story without the approval of a faculty editor. Preliminary and final drafts of the guidelines, which appear in the appendix, were approved by the editors. These guidelines were handed out in advanced reporting and copy editing classes and discussed with students. A shortened version of the guidelines for handy reference was included on the main page of the Missourian Newsroom Web Resources site. It is also included in the appendix. Let's take a closer look at the rationale for and the ethical underpinnings of the Newsroom Rules, which are part of the shortened version of the guidelines. Rule 1 requires that reporters verify information taken from a Web site and used in a story. By requiring verification, which usually entails an interview by phone, editors wanted to ensure that reporters checked the accuracy of the information with the source before using it in a story. Although verification is not easy in some cases, it was considered essential to ensure accuracy. Naturally, if the reporter questioned the source's expertise, the information must be checked with other sources, such as an official state manual or a government official. Unlike Deaver (1990), the editors did not differentiate facts from information because it is difficult to separate the two on the Web. However, they did allow for exceptions to the verification rule, such as information contained on highly credible sites, such as the Census Bureau site. But they required that a faculty editor clear all exceptions. Ethically, the editors wanted to ensure that the reporters did no harm by setting up a rule requiring that information be checked with someone who could verify its accuracy. By excluding unverifiable information from stories, editors hoped to ensure that readers would not be mislead by inaccurate information. However, the editors must still rely on the reporters to be ethical and follow the rules. That is one of the reasons why the rationale was discussed with students. It was believed that students would be more likely to follow the rules if they knew the rationale behind them. Part of the rationale was included in the long version of the guidelines handed out to students. Rule 2 requires that information taken directly from the Web be attributed, e.g. "according to IBM's Web site." As mentioned earlier, readers must know the source of the information in order to evaluate it fully. If information cannot be verified, a faculty editor must be consulted before it is used in a story. Importantly, the rule directs that when students have doubts about the accuracy of the information, they must consult other sources. This position is reinforced by the cardinal rule of newsrooms: When in doubt, leave it out. The restrictions on inclusion of unverified information are designed to prevent harm to readers. They are stated in simple yet forceful terms so that students will know what they mean. No rule is more important than the cardinal rule. If it does not appear in print, it can do no harm. The first part of Rule 3 is more of a guideline than a rule. It directs reporters to check the Universal Resource Locator, the Web address of the site. The URL is one clue to the accuracy and credibility of the information that is exclusive to the Web. Often, the URL will provide clues to the slant of the information. As the guidelines point out, most of the government ".gov" and military ".mil" sites contain accurate information, although they still have a slant. The slant of information on the Web pages of commercial and not-for-profit organizations is readily apparent. Businesses are trying to make their products appear attractive, and not-for- profit organizations generally are trying to promote a cause, such as the American Lung Association's crusade against smoking. Consequently, reporters must verify and attribute all information on those pages. Attribution will help readers assess the slant. But the most restrictive part of the rule pertains to personal home pages. These Web pages can often be determined by looking at their content and extensions, such as ".edu" for student pages and ".aol" for American Online subscribers. The rule stipulates that no information from a personal home page can be used in a story without contacting the person and without the permission of a faculty editor. This rule was imposed because personal home pages are likely to have some of the most lax standards of accuracy on the Internet. Therefore, the person must be contacted to determine the source of the information and to provide a means to verify it. In addition, the authorship of personal Web pages can be difficult to verify, and the editors determined that the author of the page must be contacted to ensure that information was indeed published by him or her. The potential to do harm is perhaps the greatest when the information comes from personal home pages. That is why the rules governing their use are the strictest. Rule 4 deals with when the site was last updated, another clue that is unique to the Web. As Deaver pointed out, timeliness is an important consideration for journalists. Many Web pages include when they were created and when the site was last updated. This information can be used to help evaluate the timeliness of the information. Although a recent date does not ensure that the information is current, it indicates that the organization or person responsible for the page is paying close attention to it. If the date that the site was last updated does not appear, the creation date can be used to assessed to timeliness of the information. When no date appears, the rule stipulates that reporters cannot use information from that site unless it is verified. Without a date, the reporter has no clue to the timeliness of the information. These restrictions are designed to ensure information is current and to help prevent reporters from misleading the readers with outdated information. Overall, these guidelines might seem strict and they are. The Missourian editors decided to be very cautious when dealing with information gathered via this new technology and make doing no harm their top priority. By imposing rigid guidelines at the outset, the editors hoped to minimize the potential harm to the readers and the reputation of the newspaper. Initial results and further research As indicated earlier, presentations about the Web site and the guidelines were given to advanced reporting and copy editing classes. Some presentations have also been made to individual beats. One beat received a presentation before the main one. The first question asked by a student was what information could be used from the site and how do you attribute it. The student seemed to anticipate the need for the guidelines. A little more than two months have passed since the students began fully using the site. Employing a Web tracking program called Analog, statistics for the use of the site were compiled. The main pages were accessed a total of 2,406 times during the period, as seen in Table 1 in the appendix. Because we have no way to compare student Web use for the period before the site was created, it is impossible to determine whether use has increased. As expected, the city desk beat page was used the most, followed by digital media and online morgues, and Internet search. The fact that the guidelines were only accessed an average of 12 times per month is a cause for concern. However, the students already had a hard copy of the longer version of the guidelines and they had been discussed in class. From these preliminary results, the site appears to be useful in getting students to use Web resources. Although the overall picture appears encouraging, the lower than expected use of some pages, including shortened guidelines, indicates that more needs to be done to encourage their use. No similar measures are available to help determine how well the Web guidelines are working. Perhaps the most important statistic is that the Missourian has not carried a correction because of inaccurate information from a Web site. Thus, the overall ethical goal of the guidelines to avoid lying and to do not harm appears to have been met. Further research could include a content analysis of the Missourian since the students began using the site. It would detail how information from the Web has been attributed in the newspaper and where it originated. A questionnaire could also be developed that focuses on the guidelines and whether they were helpful in making ethical decisions. Open-ended questions would be included to allow students to detail the advantages and disadvantages of their use. In-depth interviews could also be conducted for the same purpose. Faculty editors could be interviewed as well. Besides their scientific value, the results of these inquiries could be used to improve the guidelines. Bibliography Achenbach, Joel (Dec. 30, 1996). "Bad News." Los Angeles Times, p. 1E. Anderson, Lisa (Nov. 9, 1996). "U.S. Denies Report TWA Jet Was Downed by Navy Missile." Chicago Tribune, p. 3. Arizona Republic (Nov. 18, 1996). "A Tangled Web: Internet `News Pitfalls.'" p. B4. Associated Press (Nov. 8, 1996). "Navy, FBI Deny Missile Shot Down Jet; Salinger Offers to Share Details." Chicago Tribune, p. 1. Associated Press (March 21, 1996). "TWA Radar Blip was 2nd Plane, FBI says Crash Investigator Point to Navy Aircraft." Chicago Tribune, p. 19. Aucion, James (1996). "Implications of Audience Ethics for the Mass Communicator." Journal of Mass Media Ethics. v. 11, n. 2, pp. 69-81. Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis (1995). Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment and Future. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Publishing Co. Bennett, Charles H., Gilles Brassard and Artur K. Ekert (October 1992). "Quantum Cryptography." Scientific American. pp. 164-171. Bok, Sissela (1978). Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life. New York: Vintage Books. Cerf, Vinton G. (October 1992). "Networks." Scientific American. pp. 44-53. Coates, James (Nov. 10, 1996). "Internet is Thick with False Webs of Conspiracy." Chicago Tribune, p. 1. Cohen, Jodi B (June 9, 1996). "Surfing for Sources." Editor and Publisher. vol. 129, n. 26., p. 34 Comisssion on Freedom of the Press (1947). A Free and Responsible Press. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Deaver, Frank (1990). "On Defining Truth." Journal of Mass Media Ethics. v. 5, n. 3, pp. 168-177. Dickey, Christopher, and Mark Hosenball (Now. 25, 1996). "A Conspiratorial Turn of Mind." Newsweek, v. 128, n. 22, p 93. Dine, Philip (Nov. 9, 1996). "Officials Dismiss Salinger's Theory." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, p. 1. Goodman, John J. (March 14, 1997). "Salinger Revives Missile Theory in Flight 800 Crash." Los Angeles Times, p. 20. Hayakawa, S.I. (1939). Language in Thought and Action. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Hoffman, Paul E. (1995). The Internet: Instant Reference. San Francisco: Sybex. Kennedy, George (Winter 1994). "Newspaper Accuracy: A New Approach." Newspaper Research Journal. v. 15, n. 1, pp. 55-62. Ketterer, Stan (1995). Copy Desk Reference Site. URL: http://www.missouri.edu/~jschool\missourian\links.html. Ketterer, Stan (1996). Newsroom Web Resources. URL: http://www.missouri.edu/~jschool\missourian\index.html. Ketterer, Stan (1997). "How to Use Missourian Web Resources." URL: http://www.missouri.edu/~jschool\missourian\how.htmL. Ketterer, Stan (1997). "Missourian Guidelines for Using Information on the Web. URL: http://www.missouri.edu/~jschool\missourian\guide.htm. Los Angeles Times (Nov. 9, 1996). "Officials Deny Claim that 'Friendly Fire' Downed Jet." p. 5. McGrath, Peter (Jan. 27, 1997). "The Web: Infortopia or Marketplace?" Newsweek, pp. 82-85. Merrill, John (Nov. 22, 1996). "Dangeros Road Ahead: Ethical Potholes in the Information Highway." Speech presented at the International Symposium on Local Media Development at Channam National University in Kwanguju, Korea. Mill, John Stuart (1859). On Liberty. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co. Milton, John (1644). Areopagitica and Of Education. Arlington Heights, Ill.: Harlan Davidson, Inc. Rashbaum, William A. (March 14, 1997). "Salinger - I Have More Evidence." New York Daily News, p. 16) Reddick, Randy, and Elliot King (1996). The Online Student: Making the Grade on the Internet. San Diego: Harcourt Brace. Rocky Mountain News (March 5, 1997). "Salinger's Recklessness." p. 57A. Ross, W. (1930). The Right and the Good. Oxford, UK: Oxford University. San Francisco Examiner (March 16, 1997). "Salinger's Sad Obsession." p. C-14. Severin, Werner J., and Tankard, James W. (1992). Communication Theories: Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media. New York: Longman Publishing Co. Siebert, Fred S., Theodore Peterson, and Wilbur Schramm (1956). Four Theories of the Press. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press. Turner, Richard (Dec. 30, 1996). "When Rumors Make News." Newsweek, vol. 128, n. 27, p. 72. Wallach, Paul. (October 1992). "Wire Pirates." Scientific American. pp. 186-194. Appendix Missourian Guidelines for Using Information on the Web by Stan Ketterer General Guidelines The World Wide Web is becoming an important source of information for journalists. But journalists still must evaluate that information with a critical eye by following standard practices for assessing the credibility and accuracy of the information, primarily factual information. At the Missourian, in most cases that assessment must include contacting the source of the information to verify it. If the information is used in a story, it normally must be attributed. Although the information on each site will be different, in general apply the same criteria that you would use when assessing the credibility and accuracy of any document. Ask yourself whether you would use the information if it came from a similar printed source. As always, be skeptical and do whatever is necessary to ensure the accuracy of the information. When in doubt, leave it out. Although the use of the Web as a reporting tool is in its infancy, it appears most information will be used to acquaint the reporter with the background of a story. Online morgues and some digital media provide a quick and efficient way to gather background information. If this factual information has appeared in previous Missourian stories or in wire stories published in the Missourian or Digital Missourian, it generally does not require attribution. But the use of attribution when including information from the morgues of other media sources must be determined on a case- by-case basis. Follow the same guidelines that you would use when taking information from Lexis-Nexis. In general, attribute any information that has been uncovered by the media source, controversial information, and quoted or paraphrased information. Online dictionaries, glossaries and other reference sources can be used similarly. In general, such information does not need to be attributed, but the source of the information must be evaluated. If you are in doubt about the information, verify it with another source. Web sites maintained by government agencies and educational institutions are particularly credible for this type of information. Exercise more caution when using reference sources from commercial and not-for-profit organizations. Armed with this background information, reporters can ask more probing questions in interviews and put the story into greater context. The interview is an excellent time to verify the information and get the source's views on it. Ask whether the information on the Web page is current and current. Then, ask the source to put it into perspective. Sometimes information will be taken directly from the Web site and attributed. In general, this information will come from a highly credible source, such as the U.S. Census Bureau, or source documents published on the Web. It also can be used when the story is about the Web site itself. But it also might be employed on a breaking story when the Web is the chief source of information. ALWAYS consult your faculty editor if you take information directly from a Web Page. In general, attribute factual information to the organization, such as IBM, when you have verified it with a source. Although you should always try to verify the information, sometimes it is not possible to reach the source. If you have not verified the information, consult your faculty editor. In most cases, unverified information must be attributed to the Web page. If you have doubts about the accuracy of the information, get that information from another source, such as a book or a contact person. Reporters also can use Web resources to find out how to contact sources. Online telephone, e-mail and sources directories are helpful for this purpose. Assessing a Site's Credibility As mentioned previously, standard journalistic practices must always be used when assessing the credibility and accuracy of information on the Web. In general, the overall credibility of a site can be determined by rigorously following these practices. But the Web site itself also will provide some clues. These clues include the address of the Web site, the organization that maintains it, and when the site was last updated. The Web Address Look at the three-letter extension that appears at the end of the first part of the Web address, or URL. Web sites are assigned extensions according to the organization that maintains them. The categories are: .gov (government) .mil (military) .edu (education) .com (commercial) .org (not-for-profit organization) .net (network administration) All organizations will put some slant, or point of view, on at least some of the information that they provide. The amount of slant varies according to which category the organization is in, and it differs for organizations within categories. In addition, the amount of slant varies according to the organization's purpose for maintaining its Web site. Take that purpose into account when assessing the credibility of the information on the organization's site. The most credible information will generally come from government sites. In most cases this information is designed to serve the public interest, although some bureaucrats will slant it to make themselves and their organizations look good. A major purpose of some governmental organizations is to provide credible information to the public. This information often includes comes from Web versions of source documents. In most cases, you can take information directly from the sites and attribute it. These sites include the National Institutes for Health, the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the FBI, and NASA. Other governmental organizations are less diligent in ensuring the accuracy of the information on their sites. Evaluate the information critically and verify it. The telephone number of contacts are usually included on the site. Talk to the contact to verify the information and put it into context. The information on military sites is generally credible, but much of what you need may not be there because of national security or image concerns. For example, information about the sexual harassment cases at Fort Leonard Wood appeared in a brief on the base newspaper. In all cases, contact military officials. The primary goal of many of the commercial sites, such as the Pepsi site, is public relations. Evaluate the information accordingly. That situation is changing as more and more companies are doing business on the Web. But problems with the security of information will limit commercial use for the foreseeable future. In general, do not use factual information from commercial sites in a story unless you verify it and attribute it. By their nature, not-for-profit organizations promote a point of view. The information that they include _ and exclude _ is designed to promote that view. Evaluate the information accordingly. In general, do not use factual information from not- for-profit sites in a story unless you verify it, often from other sources, and attribute it. The credibility of information on educational sites is usually mixed. Colleges and university sites often have information, especially from source documents, that is highly credible. Information provided by the colleges and universities themselves is usually credible. But student home pages also have an ".edu" extension. Students might not be following the same standards for accuracy as the colleges and universities. Be very critical when assessing information from personal home pages. In ALL cases, contact the person and get the permission of a faculty editor before using information from a student home page. The same guidelines apply to all personal home pages, including those on online services such as American Online (aol) and the Microsoft Network (msn). Evaluate the Organization Evaluate the organization or person that maintains the Web site. As pointed out earlier, the credibility of the information will vary, even within the U.S. government. Generally, the more that you know about an organization, the better you will be able to assess the credibility of the information. For example, you could more easily assess a story in the New York Times than in Sally's Daily News. Remember, everybody on the Web is a potential publisher and they will not all have the same standards for accuracy and accountability. If you do not know much about an organization on the Web, find out. Use the morgue, the library, Nexis-Lexis or some other means to get enough background information to evaluate the information critically. In ALL cases, when you know little about a Web site, contact the source and attribute the information. Discuss the site, source and the information with your faculty editor. Site Updates Find the date when the site was last updated. The date usually appears at the top or bottom of the page, especially the first page of the site. If the site has been updated recently, you can be more confident about the timeliness of the information and it indicates that the organization is concerned with current developments. However, although a site has been updated recently, it is no guarantee that the information itself has been updated. The page might have been updated but not the information on it. This is another reason why in most cases you must verify it with a source. If the site has not been updated for a while, look for the date that the site was created, which usually appears at the bottom of the home page. If the site has not been updated for a while, if no date appears, or if it was created a while ago and has not been updated, be more skeptical of the information. In ALL cases, contact the source of the information and let your faculty editor know about the timeliness of the information. However, just because a site has been updated recently, it provides no guarantee that the information is accurate. Missourian Web Guidelines by Stan Ketterer Staff members of the Columbia Missourian newsroom must be on guard when using the resources of the World Wide Web. The degree of accuracy and the credibility of information on Web sites varies widely. Just ask Pierre Salinger, the former presidential press secretary. Salinger was ridiculed when he publicly proclaimed that a bogus document blaming the U.S. government for shooting down a TWA jetliner was authored by the French intelligence service. In general, staff members must evaluate information on the Web with a critical eye by following standard journalistic practices for assessing the credibility and accuracy of information. There are also a few evaluative tools that are unique to the Web. In most cases, Missourian staff members must contact the source of the information to verify it before it can be used in a story. In general, attribute all information from a Web site that is used in a story. Staff Rules 1. Before information from a Web site can be used in a story, it must be verified with a source. There are a few exceptions to this rule. They include taking information from a highly credible government site like the Census Bureau home page and from Web versions of source documents on such credible sites, and when you can't contact the source on a breaking story because of time constraints. But a faculty editor must clear all exceptions. 2. In most cases, information taken directly from the Web and used in a story must be attributed. If you have verified the information on a home page with a source, you can use the organization in the attribution, e.g. "according to the EPA" or "EPA figures show." If you cannot verify the information after trying repeatedly, attribute unverified information to the Web page, e.g. "according to the Voice of America's site on the World Wide Web." Consult your faculty editor before using unverified information in your story. If you have doubts about the accuracy of the information and you cannot reach the source, get it from another source, such as a book or a another contact person. When in doubt, leave the information out of your story. 3. Check the extension on the first part of the site's address, or URL, to get clues as to the nature of the organization and the likely slant of the information. The extensions are: .gov (government) .mil (military) .edu (education) .com (commercial) .org (not-for-profit organization) .net (Internet administration) Most of the government and military sites have credible and accurate information. In many cases, you can take the information directly from the site and attribute it to the organization. But consult your faculty editor until you get to know these sites. The same is true for many of the sites of colleges and universities. If college and university sites have source documents, such as the Constitution, attribute the information to the source document. But beware. Personal home pages have ".edu" extensions, and the information is not always credible. DO NOT USE INFORMATION FROM A PERSONAL HOME PAGE WITHOUT CONTACTING THE PERSON AND WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF A FACULTY EDITOR. In nearly all cases, DO NOT take information directly from the home pages of commercial and not-for-profit organizations and use it without verification. Verify and attribute all information on those pages. 4. Check the date when the page was last updated. The date generally appears at the top or the bottom on the first page of the site. Although a recent date does not ensure that the information is current, it does indicate that the organization is paying close attention to the site. If the site does not state when it was last updated, check when it was created. Creation dates generally appear at the bottom of the first page. If no date appears, if the site has not been updated for a while, or if it was created a while ago, DO NOT use the information on the site unless you verify it with a source. Table 1 Usage of Missourian Newsroom Resources HOME PAGES ACCESSES Month 1 Month 2 City Desk Beat Reference Pages 317 246 Digital Media and Online Morgues 219 147 Internet Search Engines 149 173 Sports Beat Reference Page 144 175 Phone Directories 108 101 City of Columbia 94 71 General Information 86 74 Internet Sites for Journalists 67 59 Sources, E-Mail Addresses and Discussion Group Lists 53 45 Copy Desk: Editing and Design 21 20 Missourian Guidelines for Using Information from the World Wide Web 15 10 How to Use Missourian Web Resources 13 23 Total 1262 1144 These numbers represent how many times each page was accessed during the period of Feb. 20, 1997, to March 19, 1997 and during the period of March 20, 1997, to April 21, 1997. All of these links appear on the index page.