Editorial Guidelines issues
- Accuracy
See Editorial Guidelines Section 3 Accuracy - Privacy
See Editorial Guidelines Section 7 Privacy
Key points
- We should always make our own editorial judgements on the authenticity of content or information we have sourced from the web
- We should apply our own editorial values before reusing content that is trending on social media
- We should be open and transparent in our activity on the web
- Where we are engaged in undercover work the level of deception should be proportionate to the subject matter and level of public interest.
Guidance in full
Introduction
The internet plays a central role as a source of much of the content, contributors and even information that we use in all our output. However even though it is an everyday resource we must continue to take care about how we use the information that we have gathered from the internet and how we go about gathering it.
Accuracy and impartiality
We should always make our own checks on the authenticity and veracity of information or content we find on the web β just as we would if the information came to us through an offline route.
Different websites will have different standards for truth and accuracy, so we must make our own editorial judgements before we choose to use material or information sourced from anywhere in the web.
Similarly we should be aware of the potential for bias in the use or misuse of content by other sites. We should use what we find accordingly β providing context and attribution where appropriate.
We should be aware of and take advice on legal and copyright issues.
Social media
We should apply our own values to using material that is being widely shared on social media. There may be issues around privacy, harm and offence, duty of care and consent to content that has βgone viralβ that could affect our decision to report or use that material on our own platforms.
We should also consider whether it is appropriate to report on content that is being widely shared simply because it is being widely shared or trending. We should ask ourselves what the editorial justification is for doing so first.
Where we are researching contributors or points of view we should be aware of the serendipitous nature of social media that means people may only come across the calls to action by chance.
Social media platforms will also reflect different and particular demographics so contributors or opinion sourced through social media will not be representative of any wider group in any way. That doesnβt mean we shouldnβt use them, but we should take into account the wider editorial issues before doing so.
(See Editorial Policy Guidance Note: Social Media)
Open research
Where we are conducting research openly on the web or on social media, we should always be open and transparent about who we are and what we are doing.
That also includes where we wish to engage with online communities or closed social media groups. Generally it is good practice to work with the consent of the group administrators, respecting both the terms and conditions and the culture of the community
Individuals may choose to use official ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ accounts or their own personal accounts to conduct research in consultation with their editor. When they chose to use their own accounts they should make it clear that they are working for the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ. The content of their account should be appropriate in a more professional environment and/or their privacy settings should be properly restricted.
Where we use email to communicate with contributors sourced from our internet research we should normally use ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ email addresses.
Where we are researching areas that might result in accessing content that might be harmful, offensive or distressing we should consider whether it is appropriate to undertake that research in an open room. It may be necessary to work in a private room with a closed door.
Staff should ensure that they have editorial approval and oversight for this research and where necessary β for example if they have justification for accessing offensive materials, such as pornographic websites - [ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ staff only].
Editors should also be aware of any potential impact on the wellbeing of any staff who may be exposed to such content for any length of time.
Undercover research
It is possible to conduct more covert research on the internet. The nature of that research could range from simply lurking in open spaces listening unobtrusively to conversations to setting up fake profiles to undertake more serious undercover investigations.
However, deception is only likely to be acceptable when the material could not be obtained by any other means. It should be the minimum necessary, in proportion to the subject matter and the level of public interest involved in the investigation. We should take utmost care not to involve anyone who is not a subject of the investigation in our deception.
Advice should be taken from Editorial Policy before undertaking such an investigation.
Journalists undertaking undercover investigations should also be aware of the risks of being identified by information they may have inadvertently left elsewhere on the web, or even by technical means such as ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ IP addresses. They should ensure that they take appropriate advice at all times.
The Dark Web
Any research on the Dark Web should be very carefully considered and only undertaken with senior editorial approval and clear oversight, following advice from Editorial Policy.
Where research on the Dark Web is editorially justified, staff should take particular care of all the security issues that are raised by such activity.
Last updated July 2019