When he provided advice to student journalists earlier this month, Robert Niles suggested they take a course in science as a way to understand how research can be conducted.

He has elaborated on that point in a column at Online Journalism Review that identifies the need for standar procedures to gather, verify and describe.

"Today's journalism ethics are the ethics of a profession serving yesterday's information-starved communities," he writes. "Today, we need a journalistic method that serves communities seeking truth and relevance within the abundance of information surrounding them."

He suggests journalists develop their own version of scientific methods to improve their standards to move from a medium of information to a medium of the arbiter of information.

 
 
Robert Niles, the longtime contributor to the Online Journalism Review, has a quite separate passion. To those only familiar with his writing on media, it might be a revelation that he is the publisher of Theme Park Insider.

He has been thinking of late about the ethics of expense accounting in journalism, and specifically on who pays the bills, and he has some interesting observations on how his criticism is affected when the funds come from his pocket.

He suggests most critics can't be clear-minded because their employers are footing the bills. When he reviewed a $400-a-night hotel recently, it dawned on him that he was suddenly bound to be more consumer-conscious --- he was, after all, now a consumer, and had to determine if the room fixtures and luxuries were really worth it.

Niles suggests, too, that one of the reasons user-generated review sites are so popular is that they are being graded by people who you will be if you choose that experience. Imagine, he says, if sports events were only reviewed by those who had to pay to see them.

He provides a good perspective on how the context shifts when you're the benefactor and not only the beneficiary.

 
 
In his latest post, Robert Niles identifies a common challenge as newsrooms gain some traction in the mobile space: The design doesn't always fit the function.

He found a handful of technical problems with some major sites, which suggest that smaller Web operations are having similar or even more significant problems converting their site designs to the mobile space.

He concludes: "It doesn't matter how pretty your design team makes something if the fastest growing segment of your market can never see it."
 
 
In his latest post for the Online Journalism Review, Robert Niles argues that the shift for many journalists to online entrepreneurialism is undermined by one critical issue: Journalists need to build communities all over again.

The days of assuming audience can't be taken for granted, he notes. Nor can a one-person show act like one person inside a massive organization --- it's incumbent to sell ads, create content and recruit community all at once.

Niles offers some sage advice: "If you're running a one-person shop, you can no more afford to abandon those roles as a newspaper could afford to dismiss everyone on its staff who fulfilled them."
 
 

Robert Niles, writing in the Online Journalism Review, argues that the Internet has changed some basic principles of journalism and that it's time for everyone in the craft to acknowledge and adjust.

He gives three examples of ethical issues in journalism and points to how they're necessarily redefined today.

The old rule: You can't cover something in which you are personally involved. The new rule: Tell your readers how you are involved and how that's shaped your reporting.

The old rule:
You must present all sides of a story, being fair to each. The new rule: Report the truth and debunk the lies.
The old rule: There must be a wall between advertising and editorial.The new rule: Sell ads into ad space and report news in editorial space. And make sure to show the reader the difference.

I share the view that the lines have moved, and like many journalists I worry they will shift far too much without enough thought on the consequences. But the three examples he expresses here aren't particularly radical, and it's interesting to see just how much time is spent on the rearguard activity of defending something that no longer exists.


 
 

The USC Annenberg School of Communications has discontinued financing the Online Journalism Review, arguably the most venerable entity examining reporting and news ethics in the digital sphere.
Robert Niles sent out an e-mail yesterday and I have to admit I didn't read it properly the first time, so shocking was it. As it turns out USC will contribute to the Knight Digital Media Center and its ongoing work in the field, but the OJR loss is a big loss. I feel the same way about it that someone might if a newspaper died --- the more voices the better, and in particular in the new media field, which is still on the early part of its journey. have to believe someone will scoop up the name and continue something similar somewhere.

 

DA25E68FDEC14EAFA7B2A27D26C48058