A Guide to Managing Social Media for News Sites: eModeration White Paper

Authored by

Date

26

2012

For more information call Tamara Littleton on +44 (0)20 3178 5050 www.emoderation.com

eModeration Ltd :: The Media Village :: 131-151 Great Titchfield St :: London :: W1W 5BB :: UK

A white paper examining how media organisations use and manage online

communities, the legal implications, and how best to engage users within 'owned' communities

Sept 2011 Authored by Tamara Littleton

A guide to

managing

social media

for news sites

and media

organisations

Table of Contents

Type chapter title (level 1) 1

Type chapter title (level 2) ..................................................................................................................................................... 2

Type chapter title (level 3) .............................................................................................................................................. 3




Contents

Contents Error! Bookmark not defined.

Being social in a regulated world ..................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Who wants to ‘engage’ with their bank? Banks are boring, right?Error! Bookmark not defined. The opportunities for social media for financial services companiesError! Bookmark not defined. Setting the rules of engagement ...................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Crisis and risk management over social media ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Contents



eModeration: The Guide to Social Media Engagement for Financial Organisations

2

eModeration: A guide to managing social media for news sites and media organisations

These days, news breaks on Twitter. MSNBC’s Breaking News Twitter feed

has (at the time of writing) just over three million followers; BBC Breaking has 1.5 million and

CNN has 2.2 million. These are in addition to the myriad of newsroom feeds, channel-specific

feeds and, of course, journalists’ own feeds.

This paper looks at how media organisations use and manage online communities. It’s worth

stating that it doesn’t specifically address how news organisations use social campaigns to

market themselves, but focuses on how best to engage and manage users within ‘owned’

communities (forums, comment sections, Facebook pages and Twitter feeds).

When Hurricane Irene hit the US in 2011, she had her own Twitter account (borrowed for the

duration of the hurricane from a woman of the same name). Mobile phones have played a

huge part in communicating the uprisings in the Middle East. When a US Airways plan landed

on the Hudson River in early 2009, pictures were uploaded to Twitter from mobile phones

during the rescue operation, before news teams had reached the scene. Twitter has

published a ‘Twitter for newsrooms’ guide, to ‘help creative professionals in news, TV, sports

and entertainment use Twitter effectively’ with details of publishing tools, using Twitter to

source information, and even examples of journalists using Twitter to engage with audiences

(Katie Couric and the Washington Post’s Melissa Bell are cited). At the time of writing, The

Guardian is experimenting with opening the doors of its newsroom

to the public to let us see a live account of their plans in the form

of the daily newslist kept by their editors, and had just launched

the @GuardianTagBot to help readers search for content.

http://twitter.com/breakingnews

http://twitter.com/#!/BBCBreaking

http://twitter.com/#!/cnn

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/25/twitter-facebook-uprisings-arab-libya

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/25/twitter-facebook-uprisings-arab-libya

http://media.twitter.com/newsrooms

http://media.twitter.com/newsrooms/engage

http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/oct/10/guardian-newslist

http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/oct/27/guardian-tag-bot-twitter-questions

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




3


As consumers, we don’t just receive news passively any more. We expect to comment on the

big stories of the day, interact with journalists and share our thoughts with a community of

other readers. Journalists are also bloggers, and bloggers journalists. The big publishers all

accept user-generated content on their sites, whether on blogs, articles, videos, or forums,

and with or without involvement from journalists or community managers. According to a

study of Nielsen audience stats by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in

Journalism, Facebook is the third biggest referrer of traffic to newsrooms (interestingly, Twitter

still barely registers – it seems we want topline information from Twitter only).

Of course, audience participation in media goes beyond the newsroom. Text-to-screen

technologies mean that we can air our opinions on TV via a mobile phone, from the comfort

of the sofa. New TV shows regularly get their own Twitter hashtags (the Apprentice has

become a multi-channel series) and Facebook discussions grow around breaking stories or

news based events, such as the Royal Wedding, or the Obama Town Hall debate on MTV. In

Sweden, one regional newspaper has gone so far as to open up its editorial decisions to

consumers, creating an ‘online open newsroom’ where readers can suggest and discuss

stories via a tool called ‘eEditor’, created by CoverItLive.

Traditional approaches to restricting access to news don’t work anymore, either, as a certain

UK footballer found out when his legal team tried to apply conventional privacy injunction

laws to Twitter – newspapers were

left unable to report what millions

of consumers had worked out

from Twitter. Super-injunctions

become even less effective when

you consider that the public could not possibly comply with them since they don't even know

they exist, nor is the majority of the global Twitterati bound by UK legal rulings.

http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/navigating_news_online

http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2011/06/28/su2011-swedish-newspaper-has-massive-hit-with-online-open-newsroom/

http://www.coveritlive.com/

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




4


Approaching social communities: before you start

As James Hohmann of Politico says in his paper 10 Best Practices for Social Media: Helpful

guidelines for news organizations (written for the 2010-11 ASNE Ethics and Values Committee):

“Putting in place overly draconian rules discourages creativity and innovation, but

allowing an uncontrolled free-for all opens the floodgates to problems and leaves news

organizations responsible for irresponsible employees.”

The paper is well worth reading, and outlines the social media guidelines of all the major US

news outlets.

Set guidelines – for both users and journalists

Guidelines for journalists

There are practical reasons for setting a social media policy for journalists, as shown by new

guidelines released in July 2011 by the Associated Press, which states:

“Everyone who works for AP must be mindful that opinions he or she expresses may

damage the AP’s reputation as an unbiased source of news. AP employees must

refrain from declaring their views on contentious public issues in any public forum and

must not take part in demonstrations in support of causes or movements. This includes

liking and following pages and groups that are associated with these causes or

movements. Sometimes AP staffers ask if they’re free to comment in social media on

matters like sports and entertainment. The answer is yes, with a couple of reasonable

exceptions. First, trash-talking about anyone (or team or company or celebrity)

reflects badly on staffers and the AP. Assume your tweet will be seen by the target of

your comment. The person or organization you’re deriding may be one that an AP

colleague is trying to develop as a source.”

http://asne.org/article_view/articleid/1800/asne-issues-guide-to-10-best-practices-for-social-media.aspx


http://www.ap.org/pages/about/pressreleases/documents/socialmediaguidelinesforapstaff2011.pdf


Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




5


As the Telegraph has recently seen, serious problems can occur when you integrate external

social media platforms into your editorially controlled, highly reputable news site.

This is not the first time this has happened to The Telegraph – the paper set up a #budget

hashtag tracker in 2009 which resulted in a stream of insulting tweets being published on the

website. Apart from the negative impact an abusive tweet can have on the reputation of

your brand, how can you expect site contributors to uphold the stringent community

standards that the newspaper demands when un-moderated content can be displayed

prominently on your home page from your own reporters?

http://wallblog.co.uk/2011/10/11/daily-telegraph-story-spat-explodes-with-expletitves-on-twitter/

http://www.finextra.com/community/fullblog.aspx?blogid=2771

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




6


The guidelines also warn against the possibility of bias:

“It is acceptable to extend and accept Facebook friend requests from sources, but we

should try to avoid situations that may jeopardize AP’s reputation by giving the

appearance of bias.”

Guidelines for users

It’s worth spending some time writing clear, readable guidance for

users on what is and what isn’t acceptable behaviour on the site.

Long, jargon-filled terms and conditions may be necessary for

legal reasons, but most consumers won’t read them. Highlight the

most important things you want users to do in plain language, with

a link through to the more detailed terms. This will help to set the

tone and values of the community from the outset. Be clear what

action will be taken if the rules are broken (the post will be removed, in extreme or repeat

offence cases the user will be blocked, and if illegal action is taken, then the appropriate

authorities will be notified, etc) and – importantly – take that action. The Guardian's

community standards are a good example to follow.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/community-standards

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




7


Escalation processes

Set clear escalation processes so that the community managers can respond quickly and

appropriately to issues. A subscription problem will have a different escalation process to a

security threat – make sure procedures are in place for various levels of issues.

Response policies

Do you want journalists to remain involved with the community after their article is written and

posted? We know from our own experience that where there is evidence of an authoritative

voice within the community, there are fewer issues with abusive user behaviour. It also cuts

down the amount of spam posted to the site. But it can be problematic.

Dealing with angry or abusive responses can be challenging for reporters, particularly when

the abuse is personal. If you expect your reporters to engage within the community, set clear

response guidelines and offer training in dealing with negative or personal comments.

Reuters’ policy for journalists (reported in Hohmann’s paper) states:

“Think before you post. One of the secrets to social media’s success is how easy it has

become to participate. But that also makes it easy to respond or repeat before you

have thought through the consequences. Whether we think it is fair or not, other media

will use your social media output as your news organization’s comment on topical

stories. And you will play into the hands of your critics unless you take care: Resist the

temptation to respond in anger to those you regard as mistaken or ill-tempered.”

There may even be an argument for a third party (the site’s community manager, for

example) to select posts for journalists to respond to, in order to reduce the chance of

posting in anger. AdAge published a great story on the

‘chapter missing’ from Twitter’s newsroom guide, citing a

‘throw down’ on Twitter between Jeff Jarvis and Jeff

Bercovici. It’s very easy to respond in anger with the online

world watching.


http://adage.com/article/mediaworks/twitter-s-real-lesson-newsrooms/228469/

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




8


Dealing with reader comments

You don’t have to be a social media expert to know that there are certain types of stories

that are more likely to generate abusive comments from readers. Anything covering emotive

issues - religion, race, sexuality, war, politics - is likely to attract strong feelings from readers.

Recognise which stories are likely to generate strong emotions, and deal with them

appropriately:

Make sure you adhere to the terms of the site. Don’t allow abusive or threatening posts

If appropriate, move the discussion elsewhere, for example to a forum that is separate from

the main news site. This distances the user comments from the journalists and allows you to

treat it slightly differently from a normal article discussion

If you are employing moderators (which we would strongly advise) you need to scale up

and brief them accordingly

Moderation options for reader comments

There are four options:

1. Pre-moderation (all comments are moderated before

they go live). This is obviously the safest route to take to

protect the reputation of the organisation and is the

one most news organisations opt for. However, it has a

major disadvantage in that there will be a time lag and many comments may never be

screened due to high volumes

2. Post-moderation (all comments are moderated after they go live, and removed if they are

abusive). This is slightly more risky, as inappropriate comments will be seen by the

community, and associated with the media brand. Again, there is danger that high volumes

may mean that not all comments are screened.

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




9


3. A combination of pre and post moderation. Reuters has ‘approved’ commentators –

people who have a strong record of behaving well in a community and having their

comments approved – who can move away from pre-moderation to post-moderation.

There is a cost advantage to this approach, as you don’t need round-the-clock moderation

4. Relying on the community to moderate comment s by flagging them. This is the most risky

strategy, and has the most potential to damage the brand. In the UK, however, unlike the

US, there is still some confusion around who is responsible for user-generated content on a

news site, and some news organisations take this route to try to cover themselves under the

EU Commerce Directive hosting exemption. But in practice, legal rulings on the use of the

Hosting Defence have varied: it's an extremely grey legal area. In the main, brands take

their duty of care very seriously, and agree that it is important to moderate thoroughly, to

protect the brand’s own reputation and, of course, its users. Update Oct 2011: The UK

Government are proposing a revision to the defamation laws which, if they go through,

could significantly impact the way both legal liabilities of publishers and moderation

processes.

Moderating comments on Twitter

Of course, you can’t moderate what people say on Twitter – and creating hashtags for

particular subjects can be a risk, as there’s no way of moderating a live feed. What you can

do is to moderate Twitter feeds that are pulled into websites, to avoid being ‘brandjacked’

on your site or Facebook page.

Dealing with text-to-screen comments

The only way to do this is to pre-moderate all comments using technology and human

moderators. It’s not worth the risk to the organisation’s reputation if an inappropriate post

gets through to a screen in a live TV environment. And remember that a Twitpic can make

the offending tweet viral in seconds ...

http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/


http://blog.emoderation.com/2011/10/proposed-changes-to-defamation-law-will.html

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




10


Blocking comments

Blocking comments completely is an option in some cases, for example those stories most

likely to incite a strong reaction from the community, or on coverage of a legal case. The

Portland Press Herald blocked user comments entirely in late 2010, in response to ‘vile, crude,

insensitive and vicious postings’. (That policy has since been reversed and comments are

enabled, but with a strict no-bullying policy made clear at the top of each comments page.)

But there is a real difference between negative and abusive comments. Inviting commentary

on news articles will generate differences of opinion and healthy debate. Views that disagree

with those of the news organisation should be accepted (and actually help to make the site

feel authentic, open and honest). But there is no need to put up with abuse, personal

comments or spam. Equally, libellous comments should be removed. Although in the US

publications aren’t legally responsible for libellous postings on their sites (unless altered by the

organisation – see our legal section, below), this is a more grey area in the UK, and it is good

practice to remove anything that could drag you or your users into a court of law.]

Some news organisations choose not to publish comments that are very similar to ones that

have run before, if they don’t add anything to the debate. In Reuters’ words:

“Some of the guidelines for our moderators are hard to define precisely. Mocking of

public people can be fair sport, for example, but a moderator that has just approved

30 comments calling someone an idiot can rightly decide that there’s little incremental

value in publishing the 31st. When we block comments of this nature, it’s because of

issues of repetition, taste or legal risk, not political bias.”

(Note: at the time of writing, there appears to be no engagement with the commenters

under this particular post.)

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/106403/portland-press-herald-drops-reader-comments-in-response-to-vicious-postings/


Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




11


Allowing users the right to contest a decision?

If a user contests the decision to delete a comment, or block them, don’t enter into a

discussion within the thread itself, but move the discussion elsewhere (to a contact centre, for

example). As one of our community managers, Tom Miller, says:

“It's unwise to respond to the user who is protesting a moderation decision within the

thread itself. Any limited discussion tends to snowball into more users asking 'but why X

if not Y?'. It’s best to direct it through to a contact centre. If the protest starts a new

thread, close it with something like 'Hi xx, we don't discuss moderation issues on the

board itself. Please get in touch at xxx and the forum support team will be happy to

help'. If it’s an old thread, the posts should be split to archive and a post put up along

the lines of 'A number of posts have been removed from this thread. We don't permit

discussion of moderation actions on the board itself but are happy to discuss via xxx'.

“At the contact centre, after you've explained the decision, if the user still isn't happy

and you see no reason to alter the decision, you need to close the discussion: an

almost-mean 'we're perfectly within our rights to determine who can and can't use our

services and if you can't follow the T&Cs then you're out. No further discussion will be

entered into' can work for repeat offenders or particularly silly banned users. There is of

course a nicer approach for people who’ve just got it a bit wrong, saying something

like: ‘we hope you can understand our reasoning and change how you post next

time’.”

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




12


Dealing with mis-information

Often, the community will pitch in to correct mis-

information on comment threads. Serious mis-

information posted within the community should be

corrected (and if it is defamatory, deleted). But it’s not

always readers who make mistakes. In this Mediashift

post, the author Nathan Gibbs gives excellent advice

on how to correct (and delete) erroneous posts on

social media platforms, including how to publicly acknowledge the error and notify those

who have shared it.

Dealing with anonymous comments

Asking users to register on the site – whether that’s using a social network ID or a separate

registration process - can reduce spam and abusive comments, and in some cases means

the news organisation could hand over details in

the event of a lawsuit. (It’s worth noting that

depending on the comment software used, an

IP address is usually logged with the hosting site,

even if there is no registration process.) Of course

this is not a foolproof system – as with any social

media accounts, it’s fairly simple to register false

information, but it does helps to reduce the

problem, although there is a genuine fear that it will reduce participation... The counter-

argument is, of course, whether this inhibits free speech, as explored in this article on Gigaom.

Also, linking comments to a person's real Facebook persona, for example, could be

potentially dangerous: as one of our Account Managers put it: "With so many clients, we go

out of our way to remove PI [personal information]- including real names. I don't want to be

tracked down on FB just because someone doesn't like my pro-West Ham remarks on the

FA.com. Abusive remarks hiding behind anonymity seem to me to be a lesser evil, and more

easily mitigated against."

http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2011/07/how-to-correct-social-media-errors193.html?utm_source=Community+Manager+Briefing&utm_campaign=ea040d1a6d-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-launches-new-comments-plug-in-2011-03

http://www.editorsweblog.org/multimedia/2011/03/judge_orders_the_handover_of_names_and_o.php

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/opinion/30zhuo.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/opinion/30zhuo.html

http://gigaom.com/2011/06/20/anonymity-has-real-value-both-in-comments-and-elsewhere/

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




13


Major news sites, including the New York Times, the Huffington Post and the Washington Post

decided not to allow anonymous comments after a review in 2010; the Sun Chronicle has

gone a step further, charging users a nominal one-off fee of 99 cents to register and

comment. This is payable via credit card, which means users have to register their real name

and address.

The legal issues of user-generated content on news sites

Before we get into the legalities of social media and newsrooms, I should say that we are not

legal experts. But we asked for advice from our legal partners in the US and the UK on the

legal issues facing news organisations in creating communities online, and their guidance is

below. Of course, news organisations should seek their own independent legal advice

before making decisions about the inclusion of user-generated content.

In the US, the law is clearer than in the UK in protecting news organisations from liability

following a user-generated comment on its site. Deborah Peckham, of Burns & Levinson LLP,

says:

“Under U.S. law it is clear that a news organization is not responsible for the potentially

defamatory content of third party comments posted online. Section 230 of the

Communications Decency Act (47 USC § 230 provides “No provider or user of an

interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any

information provided by another information content provider.” Accordingly, online

service providers, including news organizations that publish online, are treated merely

as “distributors” of online content and not publishers, for purposes of assigning liability.

“Furthermore, online news providers generally will not be accountable even if they edit

or remove comments, provided that the editing of content doesn’t materially change

the post or comment (for instance by adding a word or removing a word that results in

defamatory content).”

This principle applies to all social platforms. We asked if there was any difference in legal

liability for user-generated content between a platform such as Twitter and a publisher. As

Peckham says:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/12/technology/12comments.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/jul/13/paywalls-us-press-publishing

http://www.burnslev.com/our-attorneys/deborah-peckham

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




14


“Under U.S. law there is no difference. The critical element is that the

publication/distribution of comments occurs online and that the comments are

spoken/posted by a third party that is not an employee of the news organization.

Under such circumstances, there is no liability to the news organization (or the

communications platform, e.g., Yahoo! Or Twitter!)”

In the UK, this is a more complex issue. The EU Commerce Directive’s hosting exemption

removes liability for certain sites from comments posted by users provided that the content

has not been previously seen by the publisher, but it isn’t completely clear to which sites that

exemption applies (we wrote a more detailed post on this issue, here). On the subject of

defamation, Rachel Boothroyd, of WTS Legal in the UK, says:

"There is a major difference between hate comments and defamation. The first is an

unpleasant or negative expression of opinion. There is nothing unlawful about this

unless it strays into the realm of the obscenity laws. The second is unlawful and a

recourse via the courts on the basis that it is an untrue statement which would lower

that person in the eyes of the right-thinking public.

"So let’s consider the defamation issue. Display of defamatory comments beneath a

news article would attract the same analysis as any potential liability for defamation

issue online. The key question is whether the organisation is merely hosting the material

and thus may benefit from the exemption under the E-Commerce Directive (subject to

notice and take down rules) or whether it is publishing the material in which case it

does not benefit from any exemption.“

However, no publisher wants their brand to be associated with bad material, and the risk of

being sued for defamation is not the only risk that they are running: by only reactively

moderating, they are potentially hosting illegal content in the form of obscenity, terrorism,

racial abuse, child endangerment... the list goes on.

http://blog.emoderation.com/2011/04/hosting-defence-to-pre-moderate-or-not.html

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/rachel-boothroyd/12/434/567

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




15


In the US, it is only changing the sense of a user’s post that could result in the publisher being

liable for that content. Peckham says:

“For instance, if the news organization changes the sentence “Mayor Dobbins is a

thief,” to “Mayor Dobbins is not a thief,” then the new organization may lose its

immunity from publisher liability for defamatory content under the Communications

Decency Act.”

News organisations in the US and the UK have no legal obligation to hand over users’ details.

As Peckham says of the US:

“Under U.S. law there is no requirement that service providers or publisher release

identities. Typically, aggrieved subjects of allegedly defamatory content will seek legal

redress in the form of a court order requiring disclosure. While the law is unsettled, most

courts that have heard such challenges require that the complaining party submit

adequate evidence to sustain a defamation claim before they will issue an order to a

publisher requiring disclosure. That said, as a practical matter many service providers,

including news organizations will post terms of use that purport to notify posters that

they will (or will not) identify posters with or without a court order. Many simply do not

want to be sued or appear in court and so will reserve the right to reveal the names of

authors so as to avoid legal proceedings.”

Rachel Boothroyd says of the UK:

“In the UK, there is no legal right to access. In fact, it is arguable that under Data

Protection laws the news organisation would be in breach of its obligations if it gives

away personal information relating to a subscriber or otherwise a person submitting

comment. For these and other reasons, many news organisations and ISPs do not as a

matter of policy provide such details and a complainant must obtain a court order

compelling such disclosure.”

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




16


Creating engaging communities

Set the tone for each community. Different communities (and channels) require different

handling. Meg Pickard, head of digital engagement at the UK’s Guardian newspaper, is

quoted in an article by Emma Heald on editorsweblog.org as saying Twitter is a more

"conversational medium" than Facebook, and has a "real immediate journalistic aim," while

Facebook is more about sharing content with friends. In the same article, Heald goes on to

say:

“Pickard made an interesting differentiation between the way the paper uses Twitter

and Facebook in terms of the type of content it posts to each. With Facebook, it is

necessary to remember that this is more social territory, Pickard said, and that the news

from media organisations will be mixed in with news from users' friends.”

Apply resource. Managing a community takes time and effort, both from moderators and

community managers and from the journalists who created the original content. In another

article by Heald, she quotes the New York Times social media editor, Jennifer Preston, as

saying:

“The journalists have to own the page. I warn them that it's like a puppy... you have to

be prepared to commit.”

Have conversations, don’t just broadcast information. The secret to a valuable community is

to listen as well as to feed information out into the community. Asking questions, listening to

users and ascertaining the mood of the community works as market research for media

organisations and can help them develop stories that their readers want.

http://www.editorsweblog.org/analysis/2011/02/social_media_at_the_guardian.php

http://www.editorsweblog.org/web_20/2010/12/wef_study_tour_new_york_times_social_med.php

http://www.editorsweblog.org/web_20/2010/12/wef_study_tour_new_york_times_social_med.php

http://www.lostremote.com/2011/05/06/tips-for-journalists-to-listen-to-facebook-fans/

http://www.lostremote.com/2011/05/06/tips-for-journalists-to-listen-to-facebook-fans/

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




17


Stay involved. A journalist’s personal brand can support that of his or her media organisation,

and inspire loyalty, according to Brandmeajournalist.com. Although, of course, this also poses

a risk for the organisation – if a journalist leaves, his or her followers leave, too. Facebook has

a guide for journalists on how to set up their Facebook pages, including the following advice:

“Ask questions, solicit feedback, and use the wisdom of the crowd. Pages enable you

to not only have a dialogue with your community around the content you're

producing, but also enlist them in the process for crowdsourcing.”

Here is a useful guide about the kind of posts that will engage (including posting out of hours).

Dan Gillmor’s book, Mediactive, cites the example of Robert Niles:

“Robert Niles, who has created a number of online services including the award-

winning Theme Park Insider.com says that tomorrow’s journalists will need to be

community organizers—and that you’ll need to understand that the people who pay

the bills, not just the audience, comprise one of the communities you’ll need to

organize and serve. This is true for a one-person effort or a larger one.”

“Know what you’re doing online,” Niles says.

“Embrace community organizing; create value

for a community… [and] you will find a

community that will value you.”

http://brandmeajournalist.com/?p=1133

http://www.facebook.com/journalists?sk=app_221984801148814

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/media-lab/social-media/139066/new-facebook-data-show-7-keys-to-maximum-engagement-for-journalists/

http://mediactive.com/6-11-community/

http://www.robertniles.com/

http://www.themeparkinsider.com/

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




18


The future for social news

There’s an excellent article in The Economist which claims that news is going back to its

traditional roots before mass media: a time when it was spread through word of mouth in

coffee houses and taverns, via leaflets and newsletters. Those coffee house conversations are

now held on Facebook, and Twitter has replaced the pamphlet. But the basic human

behaviour – sharing information and views on current events – hasn’t changed.

While of course social media doesn’t cause revolutions, it plays a part in communicating

those revolutions to the outside world, faster than we have ever known (and in doing so

facilitates them, provides critical mass to nascent movements). A consumer with a mobile

phone is as likely to provide that front page story as a journalist in situ. The traditional news

model – one way communication of news – has shifted for good. But consumers are still

seeking out reliable news sources over these new channels, just as journalists are seeking out

reliable sources.

Managed properly, the engagement between news media and consumers could benefit

both sides immeasurably.

http://www.economist.com/node/18928416

Table of Contents







Contents



Contents




19


About eModeration

eModeration Limited is an award-winning social media management agency. It works with

some of the world’s biggest brands (including BBC Worldwide, ITV, HSBC, MTV, Sony Mobile,

ESPN, Hyundai, Smirnoff, the LEGO Group, Sprint and The Economist) and agencies (including

Starcom MediaVest Group, Wieden + Kennedy, Ogilvy, Saatchi & Saatchi, DDB Worldwide,

Crispin Porter + Bogusky and Publicis Groupe).

Based in London UK, with offices in Los Angeles and New York, eModeration provides multi-

lingual moderation and community management services, consultancy and social media

crisis management training to clients in the TV, entertainment and digital publishing industry

and blue chip clients hosting online communities.

Committed to ethical business practices and to the promotion of child online safety,

eModeration's CEO Tamara Littleton recently worked with the UK Government department

UKCCIS to produce its guidelines on how to moderate online environments for children.

eModeration contributes to the growth of knowledge in the social media world via its white

papers, blogs and seminars, and has a strong roster of returning clients who appreciate the

high quality of its services.

Media and blogger contacts:

For eModeration: To speak to Tamara Littleton, CEO, eModeration, please contact: Kate

Hartley, Carrot Communications, Tel: 0203 178 5052 / email [email protected]

http://www.emoderation.com/

http://reputationonline.co.uk/2010/09/24/announcing-the-reputation-online-effectiveness-award-winners/

http://www.emoderation.com/2011-02-08%20UKCCIS%20release%20updated%20guidelines%20to%20industry.pdf

http://www.emoderation.com/about/publications

http://www.emoderation.com/about/publications

mailto:[email protected]

A Guide to Managing Social Media for News Sites: eModeration White Paper

Business

Transcript of A Guide to Managing Social Media for News Sites: eModeration White Paper