Sarah Whelband, Account Director
During the aftermath of the London riots, a journalist took to Twitter to ask whether journalists have a moral responsibility to dispel rumours, rather than to report the news.
As I, and many thousands of people, turned to Twitter during the riots to keep up-to-date with what was going on, it was clear that there was a huge amount of scaremongering with rumours flying about. Hearsay was tweeted and re-tweeted to hundreds of people in a matter of seconds.
It also became apparent that people were turning to journalists on Twitter to get clarity and reassurance; to confirm or deny whether the rumours of spreading violence and mayhem were in fact true.
It was interesting to see how the role of the media changed during those few days. Using social media as the medium to communicate with the local community, journalists became mediators; a calm voice of authority within the storm of tweets all around them.
I believe journalists do have a responsibility to dispel rumours and it is a huge moral dilemma, but also a duty, for them to avoid sensationalising and exacerbating a situation that could quickly spiral out of control, even though it may make a great story. It was shocking to see how rapidly sentiment spread across England, resulting in ‘copycat’ riots occurring in cities right across the country, all encouraged by people on Blackberry Messenger, Facebook and Twitter.
Social media is now becoming as influential as traditional TV and radio news coverage and I believe that the journalist’s role needs to adapt to fit this new audience. It should not be just about getting a great headline, or the biggest scoop, but also about giving a balanced and accurate view of the facts.
0 comments:
Post a Comment