New study on social media impact on journalism–wanna know why media isn’t trusted?

Oh my, a quick glance at this new study by ING on social media’s impact on journalism very quickly highlights a big reason for public distrust of media.

A key finding: Most journalists say social media content isn’t reliable, but 50% use it as a main source of information. Only 20% check their facts before publishing.

OK, let me see if I understand this. You’re a reporter and you are using Twitter or Facebook as your source for a story. You know/believe that what you are finding on there isn’t reliable. But you rush to publish without checking facts. In fact, you publish first on social media where (60% of you anyway) believe that the same journalistic rules don’t apply.

While the study is Europe-focused and uses a small sample, the findings seem to ring true. Faster, faster with less and less concern about accuracy because, well, it can be corrected later. Professional journalism, rather than combatting the inherent problem with crowd sourcing news, is rapidly adopting the worst aspects of it–in fact amplifying the errors. PR Newser notes that PR folks are finding journalists are checking with them less and less to confirm information. Further, despite the fact that journalists recognize the inherent unreliability of social media content, they report they consider statements about a company on social media more reliable than what the company puts out. Again, that shouldn’t surprise us, but, think about it. A company puts out information knowing it has to be very careful to protect its credibility and the journalists they submit to find whatever any Joe says on social media to be more credible!

What about the future? Those responding to the study fully expect more of the same, and worse. Faster and faster reporting, more reliance by them and the public on crowd-sourced news and social media, less fact checking–and presumably, less trust in corporate communications.

What does this mean? To me (no surprise) it means “you are the broadcaster.” As professional journalism comes to mimic and look more and more like crowd journalism, for companies and organizations the emphasis HAS to be on communicating directly through their own channels. The press release was declared dead a long time ago. Seems to me this study might have just buried it.

 

Seattle City Light SEO-boosting contract ridiculed

Seattle City Light has two significant PR issues going, and this is a case of one plus one equals ugly.

First is the action being considered by Seattle City Council to raise the pay of the CEO of the city-owned utility, Jorge Carrasco, to a max of $364,000. He is already the highest paid city official in Seattle but Council is considering giving him a raise of $60,000 per year.

Second, Seattle Times Columnist Danny Westneat, is having a problem with a $47,000 contract signed by Carrasco with Brand.com to burnish its online reputation. Westneat says the goal of the contract was to “buff up” the eco-credentials of Carrasco and to counter some negative online content about the agency thereby creating better search results.

Westneat has several problems with this: Brand.com apparently offered “doctorate level content” but some of the articles showing up looked to be written by an algorithm rather than a person–although I can see a beginning writer churning out such jargon-laden meaninglessness. The other, of course, is the idea that Carrasco would spend utility-rate-payer-city taxpayer dollars on anything related to burnishing his image.

All of this represents a conundrum to me. Reading Westneat’s column, the entire thing looks ill-conceived, ham-handed and downright foolish. And of course, that is what Westneat wants it to look like. But is it really?

Online reputations are a big issue as we as a society in general turn to the internet and what’s on there to become informed. Nasty reviews or negative articles can take a position in searches not warranted by the organization involved or any action. It’s just that outrage tends to attract attention and the internet seems to be a great place to express outrage. Seattle City Light, like any responsible public or private entity, wants to have an online presence that represents reality and not have searches dominated by a few with gripes. So what do you do? The strategy employed by them of countering the negative with more positive is a common strategy. Others, like those in Europe, have turned to the courts and have successfully forced Google to remove content from its searches that they don’t like. The folks asking for removal are demonstrating why this may not be such a good idea.

Having worked with a major city utility for a number of years (not Seattle City Light) I am well aware of how local reporters and news agencies love to demonize such organizations any chance they get. Reasons are obvious: people need power and if provided by the city they get no choice and it gets tied to every other issue or gripe that people have. That means it is rich fodder for columnists and reporters like Westneat. So let’s recognize that they have a hound in this hunt too, and anything that smells like combating the rather one-handed game they play is something they will attack with vigor.

That being said, it seems if City Light wanted to burnish their online image they should not have considered a contract, and apparently particularly with brand.com. Don’t they have some talented young PR staffers who could do some of this? Aren’t there other ways to improve search results? Or maybe they should do like the guy in Europe who tried to kill his family, and ask Google to take any bad stuff about City Light off the search results.

A dilemma indeed.

 

 

 

Seattle Pacific University Shooting–and the powerful words of a reluctant hero

I’m a very proud alum of Seattle Pacific University. I’m also a former faculty member and dad of another proud alum–our daughter. So the shooting struck very close to home. I commented on this, from a crisis and emergency communication standpoint over at emergencymgmt.com, so I won’t repeat myself here.

Instead, I just want to amplify the message sent by Jon Meis, the building security monitor who pepper-sprayed the shooter and tackled him when he paused from his rampage to reload his shotgun.

Here is a photo of the young hero.

Screenshot 2014-06-09 14.33.46

I’ve commented here recently about the linkage between crisis response, communications and character. I can say with great gratitude and pride that the character of SPU, which I know well, shined through with power and beauty through this event.

Jon Meis is one example of that character. He represents a student body and community who would understand deeply and share every sentiment he expressed in his remarkable statement. The fact that he is trying to avoid the accolades, attention and even money being thrown at him demonstrates that actions speak louder than words, even the incredibly power words and sentiments he is expressing.

Here is Jon Meis’ statement:

To my brothers and sisters at Seattle Pacific University, and my brothers and sisters in Christ throughout the nation and the world,

Words cannot come close to expressing the tragedy that occurred this past week on our campus. Like everyone else, I would hear of these horrible events on the news, but go home knowing that it could never happen to us. On Thursday, my life changed. I was thrown into a life and death situation, and through God’s grace I was able to stop the attacker and walk away unharmed. As I try to return to a normal life in the aftermath of this horrible event, I pray above all things for strength for the victims and their families. While my experience left me in physical shock, I know that many people are dealing with much greater grief than I have experienced, and in honesty I probably would not be able to handle myself right now if I had personally known the victims.

I know that I am being hailed as a hero, and as many people have suggested I find this hard to accept. I am indeed a quiet and private individual; while I have imagined what it would be like to save a life I never believed I would be put in such a situation. It touches me truly and deeply to read online that parents are telling their children about me and telling them that real heroes do exist.

However, what I find most difficult about this situation is the devastating reality that a hero cannot come without tragedy. In the midst of this attention, we cannot ignore that a life was taken from us, ruthlessly and without justification or cause. Others were badly injured, and many more will carry this event with them the rest of their lives. Nonetheless, I would encourage that hate be met with love. When I came face to face with the attacker, God gave me the eyes to see that he was not a faceless monster, but a very sad and troubled young man. While I cannot at this time find it within me to forgive his crime, I truly desire that he will find the grace of God and the forgiveness of our community.

I would like to truly thank the responders who secured the building and the medical staff who looked after myself and those who were injured. After being in this situation myself, it is even harder to imagine what it would be like to have a job where one’s life is willingly put on the line every day. To our police, emergency responders, and armed forces, you have my greatest respect.

I am overwhelmed with the incredible generosity that has been showered upon me. It has been deeply touching to read the comments online and realize that my actions have had such a strikingly widespread effect. Moving forward, I am strongly requesting that any future donations be given to the victims through Seattle Pacific University.

I am grateful for the prayers and support coming from our home city and afar. In these next few days, weeks, and months, please continue to pray for everyone in the Seattle Pacific community. We serve a truly awesome God and I firmly believe that it is through Him alone that we will find the strength to heal from this tragedy.

Jon Meis, Student, Seattle Pacific University