Author: Camille Paskind

Editor’s note: Lindsay Palmer led Cultures in Conflict: Navigating Cultural Difference in International Human Rights Reporting conference Feb. 9 and 10, which was co-sponsored by the Center for Journalism Ethics. Information about the conference is here.

A 25-year-old woman, covered from head to toe in burn scars, might strike some photojournalists as a victim. In fact, photographing this woman from the perspective of pity, repulsion, or even plain curiosity, might even be more lucrative for a photojournalist trying to get quick money for a picture.

But for documentarian and photographer Gillian Laub, it was crucial to slow down and spend more time with Kinneret, a young lady in Tel Aviv who had suffered serious burn wounds across 70 percent of her body during the Second Intifada. If she could spend more time engaging with this woman, then Laub thought her photographs might capture something more than victimhood. With some work, her photos might reflect the optimism and resilience that drove Kinneret to write these words: “My goal is to show the world that the force of life is stronger than everything.”

Speaking at a recent conference on ethics in human rights reporting, Laub reflected on Kinneret’s remarkable strength — something that still inspired her years after she included Kinneret’s haunting statement in her photo monograph Testimony. From Laub’s perspective, human rights photographers and reporters should strive to avoid the easy path of “victimization,” instead looking for the more complicated stories of subtle resistance — the quieter ways in which people who have suffered terrible atrocities can stand up and move forward.

The theme of searching for the more complicated stories surfaced again and again at a conference on international human rights reporting Feb. 9 and 10 at University of Wisconsin-Madison. And it was arguably the female journalists who spearheaded this discussion. The women who participated as keynote speakers and panelists overwhelmingly asserted the need for human rights reporters to slow down, engage more with sources, and seek different perspectives.

Female human rights reporters often tout this philosophy, as some of my own research on war reporting has shown. In the process of interviewing female correspondents who work in warzones, I’ve noticed that some women in this field repeatedly tend to emphasize the concept of a more “human” human rights story. They try not to look “down” on the catastrophes from a distance, reducing those horrors to statistics, dramas between governments, or descriptions of military might. Instead, these women look for the diverse stories of the people on the ground, engaging with their complexity rather than making them small.

This phenomenon begs the question: What is it about the female journalist that engenders this different style of human rights reporting? And how might female reporters contribute to a more ethical human rights journalism?

To answer that tricky question, we might want to take a moment to define the slippery term “female” in the first place, something that feminist activists and scholars have been trying to do for centuries. By the late 20^th century, feminist thinkers were beginning to doubt that the words “woman” and “female” could adequately account for diverse lived experiences of all the human subjects who had been placed within these categories, sometimes against their own will.

There was also the fear of “essentialism” — the misguided idea that all women share “essential” characteristics that are rooted in the body and impossible to change. Far too often, women’s ostensibly “essential” characteristics have been used to hold them back, to claim that they can’t succeed, and that they have no contribution to make (other than giving birth). The fear of essentialism likely explains why other female human rights journalists do not emphasize any unique style of reporting, instead vehemently arguing that they are no different from men, and that they work in exactly the same way.

At first glance, examining female journalists’ unique contributions to human rights reporting might look very much like essentialism. Surely the differences between a white, cis-gendered female journalist from Australia and a brown, trans-gendered female journalist from Colombia are too vast to gloss over, even for the sake of philosophical discussion. And doesn’t the invocation of “women’s contribution” simply impose that same difference (and, by extension, degradation) upon the resourceful people who cover war and conflict just as well as (and often, better than) male journalists?

I would answer “yes” to each of the above questions. Yet, at the same time, I would also argue that if we get rid of “essential” notions of femininity and instead focus on socio-cultural positioning, then my original question is still worth considering. As numerous feminist scholars have argued, gender is culturally constructed. It’s a position within a particular social world, and the experience of it differs drastically across cultures and communities. Some people choose to leave that position and seek out a new one. Others continue on with the gender they have been given, but they use that experience to see their society from a different angle.

The takeaway here is that different socio-cultural positions imply the possibility of different perspectives — not the “essential” reality, in every case, for everyone. But certainly, the possibility. Because human rights reporters who have been identified as “female” are typically placed in a less-privileged social position than their male colleagues, they have the potential to offer their news audiences a very different perspective on the events they are covering.

This is important, because so many of the events that human rights reporters cover are directly related to social privilege — or to put it more bluntly, to the stark inequalities that have only been exacerbated in the era of globalization. Because they already know something about inequality, female-identified journalists might be better positioned to shed light on inequalities.

But getting rid of “essential” notions of femininity also means that we’d have to push past the idea that only women can provide these different perspectives. By the late 20^th century, a number of feminist scholars and activists themselves started arguing for the intersectionality of cultural identity, encouraging people to think more carefully about the multiplicity (and interrelatedness) of difference. These thinkers wanted to understand how other types of identity — race, sexuality, social class, nationality, religion — could also have an impact on the way someone experiences the world. In fact, understanding and engaging with these various types of socio-cultural identity became part of the feminist mission.

Following this, maybe we should change our original question and ask the following: what can human rights journalists who are culturally positioned as “different” or “other” from their more socially privileged colleagues contribute to the practice of human rights reporting? And is there a “feminist” and “intersectional” approach to human rights journalism that would allow for more ethical coverage of the vast inequalities that plague the world today?

Venezuelan photojournalist Adriana Fernández seems to think about human rights reporting in this way. At the recent human rights conference at UW-Madison, Fernández told the audience about a time when she had to cover the accidental death of a pregnant 18-year-old woman in Venezuela. Alexandra Conopoy had been killed by a drunk member of the military police while waiting in line for government-subsidized food in the Venezuelan town of Charallave. After this incident, numerous reporters scrambled to gain access to Conopoy’s family, hoping for an exclusive interview or a “great shot” that they could sell to a big international news agency.

Rather than hounding the family, Fernández thought about how she could relate to these people—what social, cultural, and national experiences did they share? What must they be suffering, and what sense of injustice must they feel? In other words, she tried to see the incident from the family’s perspective, rather than from the perspective of a detached journalist trying to narrativize their pain for a foreign audience. And instead of maintaining an “objective distance” from the family, Fernández told them how sorry she was for what they had been through and sat quietly with them as they processed their loss. Eventually, the family granted Fernández permission to shadow them as they attended the funeral. One of her photos from the funeral directly reflects her empathizing position, her more engaged approach to covering the story.

It’s important to note that Fernández and Laub’s approaches to human rights reporting are not “essentially” female—male reporters can engage in this kind of journalism too, and some of them do. However, there is a certain advantage to being socio-culturally positioned as an “other.” The lived experience of inhabiting this culturally-inscribed position — one that is typically not as privileged as the white, Western male position — can perhaps make it easier to relate to other injustices in the world, and to recognize the subtlety of strength.

But because this approach to human rights reporting does not depend on “essential” notions of gender, race, nationality, or any other type of social identity, there’s another important point that needs to be made. Ideally, all human rights journalists could strive for this more careful approach to covering the world’s conflicts and atrocities.  All human rights journalists could think more critically about their own social position, taking the time to better understand the perspectives that might drastically differ from those of the socially-privileged. With intersectional feminist correspondents leading the way, this important type of international reporting could become more ethical, more nuanced, and more focused on the “human” element of human rights journalism.

Drones aren’t just for large newsrooms.

Brittany Schmidt, journalist and reporter for WBAY-TV in Green Bay, said drones are especially important for small and mid-size news markets.

“Instead of talking about the remodeling of this huge, 80,000 square foot building, we now have the chance to literally show people from a bird’s eye view how big this project really is, and I think it helps put the story in perspective,” she said.

The use of drones is getting increasingly common among local news channels and private people at the same time, raising ethical issues.

To discuss about the ethical perspectives of using drones and how important it is for an operator to get training before using a drone, Schmidt and Will Sentowski, photographer and drone operator at WBAY-TV, answered questions about how small-markets can use drones to tell better stories.

Sentowski, photographer and drone operator of WBAY-TV in Green Bay answered questions attended a drone training in June held in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at UW-Madison.

Q: You got your first license to operate drones. How is your experience with it so far?

A: So far, so good…save for one kind of expensive crash. Although it takes awhile to do all your pre-flight checking for safety, once airborne, the drone provides some beautiful pictures that a proper journalist can use in a multitude of ways. It’s also very fun to fly, but a little on the stressful side so far, since as somewhat of a novice pilot, I’m more worried about safety than video quality. The more I fly, the more comfortable I’ll be with my aircraft.

Q: What kind of ethical issues do you face while using a drone for a story?

A: We professional Part 107 licensees care a great deal about ethics and safety. In today’s polarized times, there are lots of people who oppose drone use by newsgathering agencies without any facts to base their fears upon. It’s up to us to educate the public by using these aircraft responsibly. No hovering right outside somebody’s window to peer inside, and no loitering over a private residence w/o a valid newsgathering reason (for instance, if police are digging up a backyard looking for bodies.) The more that we use these aircraft in a responsible and safe manner, the more the public will hopefully see that there’s nothing to fear or be mad about from a drone in a licensed operator’s control.

Q: As drone journalism gets more popular, is it also increasing ethical problems in terms of using drones in private properties and security restricted areas? How ethics are being followed?

A: Ethics violations of privacy are far more common from hobbyist operators than us Part 107 professionals. Unfortunately, the public often doesn’t know the difference. Many stations, like WBAY, draft policies that are available to the public (and distributed to local law enforcement) detailing our usage of drones, and our commitment to doing so in a safe and ethical manner. And we stick to those policies. As for secure areas, we generally steer clear, but we do maintain the right to fly nearby them but often not over. Some examples would be a local power plant (we could legally fly over the river near it, but not over it) and a local prison (forbidden to fly over it by state law-possibly challenge-able in court, but we’ll err on the side of caution and avoid the area.) Usually, plain old common sense and good judgment get the job done.

Q: Do you own a drone, and if so, how many? How often do you use them? Were there any complaints about using drone, such as violating privacy, disturbing the general public or for security reasons?

A: I only own a couple of toy drones. WBAY owns three: two for newsgathering, and one for our commercial production department. We use them usually at least once a week, and are always seeking out new, but safe, avenues to utilize them. So far, I don’t think we’ve had any complaints from the public, due to the restrained and educated way we deploy our aircraft. Not to say that won’t be the case in the future, though, you never know.

Q: Do you recommend drone training? If yes why? Does it help to be more cautious about ethical issues while using a drone?

A: I heartily recommend drone training from professionals, such as the Poynter workshop we took part in. I don’t think I would have been a worthy pilot had I relied solely on online instruction to pass my Pat 107 exam. We learned so much more than just what answers to put on the test. It definitely made us better, safer operators. I am quite grateful for the opportunity. It really was my launch pad (pardon the pun) into the world of UAS operations. Can’t wait to do even more!

To get more insights of using drone, Schmidt said the days of having a helicopter to send out for aerial views are fading unless you are in the top 30 markets. Having a drone operator allows the reporter, the photographer, even the entire newsroom, to think beyond the story and outside of the box for viewers. In journalism school, you learn the basics of videography and varying shots of tight, medium and wide. Well a drone allows you to go well beyond that and truly tell a complete story that will keep the viewers’ attention.

Q: What are the ethical issues you have confronted so far in terms of using drones in your stories?

A: I haven’t personally run into too many ethical issues when using drone footage for my stories because I typically use it for redevelopment projects or similar-type stories. However, I can certainly see where ethics could play a major role in getting video for a story. I think first and foremost we have to ask ourselves what the drone video will be used for and what it adds to the story. There always needs to be a reason and it has to be a group conversation within your newsroom. For example, if there is a missing child in a wooded area, would a news stations drone help or hinder the search? I think ethics should always be part of the conversation when pertaining to a story, maybe even more so when you are not limited to video on the ground.

Q: Do you recommend training before using drones?

A: Yes, yes and more yes. I think training for drones is vital to the use of the video, both productively and ethically. I think it’s also important because a drone operator should know their rights as well. Just because someone doesn’t want you getting video of their building because it’s been condemned, doesn’t mean you have to pack up and go home. Know where you can legally stand and operate your drone. You also have to be legally licensed to operate one in the news world.

Q: Do people or institutions complain about violating privacy, security concerns or disturbance while operating drones?

A: I have not personally had people or institutions complain about their violation of privacy when using a drone. Again, I am not a drone operator so I am not the one actually getting the video, but I have used drone footage in my daily stories. I think it goes back to the basics and you have to ask yourself: What the video will add, what could it take a way, and do I really need it to tell a complete and factual story? I think people are more familiar with drones than they used to be, but that doesn’t mean you should fly it into someone’s backyard.

I recently did a story about the refurbishing of the Brown County Court House dome and we were able to get really neat shots from up above. We talked so much about its importance to the Green Bay skyline and how the unique copper dome stood out and with the drone, we were actually able to capture those moments for viewers. Video is extremely powerful for viewers and I think by using the drone video in this story, we were able to connect with them on a different level.

Too many young journalists go into high-risk areas without proper safety training, without identifying mentors and without a true plan of what they’re going to do when they arrive, said Bruce Shapiro, director of the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma.

Shapiro’s message to those young journalists is simple:

“Just don’t. Just stop.”

Shapiro was speaking Feb. 9 on a panel at “Cultures in Conflict: Navigating Culture Difference In International Human Rights Reporting,” a conference hosted by the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication and The Institute for Regional and International Studies. The Center for Journalism Ethics was a sponsor of the event.

Shapiro, Sheila Coronel, a journalist and co-founder of the Philippines Center for Investigative Journalism and Adriana Fernandez, an independent photojournalist, said journalist safety is an ethical obligation of media organizations and journalists.

In recent years, all three panelists have seen growth in the discussion of journalist safety.

“One of the greatest innovations in journalism over the last decade has been the rise of training that encourages all of us to think strategically and critically and to learn from every close call to improve our own practice,” Shapiro said. “Because we’re not doing our job as journalists if we’re not keeping each other safe.”

Shapiro added that more generally, while physical injuries can be seen by the naked-eye, psychological injuries can be just as, if not more, debilitating to a journalist’s work, mission and career.

According to Shapiro and Coronel, the rise in safety concerns has created an ethical obligation for employers to keep their employees safe.

Coronel observed that threats to women specifically are actually worse in 2018 than they have been previously due to the addition of social media harassment.

This can have a detrimental effect on many female journalists because women may decline assignments for fear of being harassed or threatened.

“For the most part whether its physical, online or sexual harassment, women don’t complain or inform their bosses for fear that they’ll be taken off of their beats or lose their jobs,” she said.

Shapiro noted that the ACOS Alliance, an organization that features a collaboration between news organizations, press freedoms, NGOs and journalists, is just one group committed to taking practical steps to improve the safety of freelance journalists in the field.

Fernandez, an independent freelance journalist based in Caracas, Venezuela, added that “details matter” when covering high-risk areas.

“When you’re covering conflict people don’t always see you with good intentions,” Fernandez said. “Gestures, clothing, language, accent, everything can make a difference.”

Coronel also said that journalists have an ethical responsibility in their reporting to stick closely with the facts, use as neutral language as possible and produce solid work to try and keep themselves safe in high-risk areas.

“Ethical news practice is also highly associated with psychological resilience and safety,” Shapiro said. “If you can look yourself in the mirror at the end of the day, and know why you are there, then no matter how awful the story you’re covering is, if you know why you’re there, your news judgments will be better, your safety judgments are going to be better.”

Read Part 2: Gould’s advice to other journalism instructors, “Teaching students to cover stories that hit close to home.”

It takes a toll.

At first, you try to ignore it.

But then it comes at you so quickly you cannot.

When allegations first surfaced that Larry Nassar had sexually assaulted women here at Michigan State University and the USA Gymnastics team, it was a stunning revelation.

We didn’t talk about it much at first. It was seemingly another crazy story in our newsfeed, the kind we often seem numb to now.

Student media covered it, but with no understanding of the breadth and depth of what was to come.

It was also a difficult story to cover.

Victims weren’t talking.

University officials tight lipped.

Investigators had little to offer.

Getting campus reaction seemed trite, so aside from a few stories here and there, the story didn’t gain that much traction at first.

In early December, before the end of the fall semester, Nassar struck the first of several plea deals and was sentenced to 60 years in federal prison on child pornography charges.

The case started to heat up. Our students covered the sentencing—but that led into finals week and off to break they went.

With the start of a new semester, fresh faces came to our journalism classes. Many are learning to be journalists for the first time. Others are delving into advanced storytelling.

Bob Gould, broadcast journalist in-residence at Michigan State University.

As a broadcast journalism instructor, my students were a month away from their first newscast, but Nassar was back in court with another plea, this time a sentencing for sexually assaulting young women.

In a system where victims are rarely identified, a new paradigm emerged. More than a 150 victims came forward, one-by-one, to tell their emotionally charged story in open court, confronting the man who had ruined their lives and took away their innocence.

We discussed the case briefly in class, but because the newscast was a month away, covering this testimony would seem dated by then.

So I ignored it.

But here I was, with the largest story to ever hit my university, my alma mater, my employer, and I was ignoring it.

My thought was to carry on, business as usual. We had a job to do: Educate students and prepare them for life after college. By ignoring it, I hoped it would take their minds off of it. Class would serve as a distraction from what was happening.

But it takes a toll.

Students tell me that they were distracted. Many spending every available minute with necks bent to their iPhones for the latest news.

It triggered emotional responses for those who have experienced sexual assault or harassment.

I realize now that deep down I was in denial. I didn’t want to cover a story that affected our university so greatly. It also meant extra work. This would not be an easy story to do. It starts to overwhelm you.

As the hearing went on, the pit in my stomach grew.

This sentencing went on for a week with local, state and national media focused right here in Lansing, Michigan.

After the third day, I called my teaching colleague Mike Castellucci.

“This is the biggest story you and I will probably ever see at this university,” I told him. “We are doing a disservice to our students, the community and our j-school by not covering this.”

We couldn’t ignore this anymore.

During the court proceedings, peripheral stories start to emerge.

The university president came under fire with calls for her to resign. The Board of Trustees pledged full support of her; the tension on campus escalated with protests and marches. ESPN published a scathing report. It seemed every hour a new story broke.

How would we approach all of this with our students?

Gould’s class watches as classmate and State News editor Rachel Fradette does a live interview on a national network. Photo by Bob Gould.

The State News, the student independent voice newspaper, was doing a great job of staying on top of the story, but it was not as easy for students in our classes.

After hanging up the phone with Mike, we agreed how we’d approach this in class the next day. We started with a discussion and asked questions.

“How are you feeling?”

“What is the emotional temperature?”

“Are you ready to tackle this case as journalists?”

Perhaps not surprisingly, the class completely absorbed themselves into the discussion. If you are an educator, you understand that feeling when you hit on something and you know everyone is paying attention. Phones are off. Laptops are closed. Eyes are tightly focused on you as you facilitate the conversation.

Students watch on TV monitors news of former Michigan State University faculty member Larry Nassar’s sentencing for sexual assault. Photo by Bob Gould.

They wanted to talk and they jumped at the opportunity to tell the story.

We went around the room for story ideas. We decided our first newscast would be a special edition devoted entirely to this case.

The weeklong sentencing came to an end, just as class began for the day. Students gathered quietly staring at CNN’s projected images in our newsroom and hallways waiting anxiously for judge Rosemarie Aquilina to seal his fate.

Within the week, the president and athletic director resigned.

The board appointed an unpopular choice for interim president.

The investigation turned to the football and basketball programs.

Another sentencing – this time in another county – and more victim testimony, including a father, full of emotional rage, who lunged to try and attack Nassar.

Over the course of the hearings, 265 women made statements. More protests, and more calls for the board to resign.

There is certainly no lack of stories to be told.

But it takes a toll.

The entire campus community is struggling to deal with all of this.

“We don’t get to mourn our school like everyone else does because you have a job to do. We must separate ourselves,” said Rachel Fradette, State News editor-in-chief.

Everywhere you go, someone will ask, “What is it like on campus right now?”

When you see other faculty in the hallways, you can’t help but discuss the latest news.

One student told me it’s going to be difficult to graduate in May, leaving the university during all this turmoil.

Fradette said covering this case creates mixed emotions.

“The reporting is doing something very important, but at the same time it’s hard to see the school you care about collapse. There’s some guilt to knowing we had a hand in that.”

It takes a toll.

But we can’t let our students down. They deserve that much from us.

Bob Gould is a 1990 graduate of Michigan State University and is now in his 11^th year teaching broadcast reporting and media law & ethics in the MSU School of Journalism after working 17 years in a television newsroom. He has been honored with more than 40 industry awards, most recently the “Robin F. Garland National Educator Award” from the National Press Photographers Association.

Read what Gould learned from covering a case that was so close to home with student journalists.

Bob Gould, broadcast journalist in-residence at Michigan State University.

Editor’s note: This compilation of teaching tips is a companion piece to the author’s essay on what it was like to teach student journalists to cover events that affected the campus community deeply.

Read Part 1: “Reporting on Nassar: It takes a toll.”

Here’s what I’ve learned from covering this case with student journalists:

• We have to teach students to be compassionate journalists but put away your personal emotions long enough to tell the story. Covering a story that you are personally connected to is not easy, but this isn’t something you can recuse yourself from. One student told me, “It was exciting to cover a story that huge outlets are covering, but it’s so sad and tears at your emotions.”
  

  Rachel Fradette, editor-in-chief, The State News appears on a national network to talk about the campus climate during sentencing of former Michigan State University faculty member Larry Nassar. Photo by Bob Gould.

• We have to facilitate discussion in our class. Make time at least once a week to hear their thoughts, to give them the cathartic, therapeutic feeling. Remember that they often want to talk about this, but do know that this can also trigger emotions, so be mindful of those that may step out of the room.

• Go back to journalism basics. Don’t be afraid to search for the truth.

• Minimize harm. Maximize truth. Hold the powerful accountable. Give a voice to the voiceless. Remember the victims in this case and make sure the students have compassion. Be judicious in how you report victims’ names and show their faces.

• Recommend counseling or support groups that pop up on campus. But merely suggesting isn’t always enough. You may have to bring the counseling to the classroom because often students are afraid to get help.

• Take time in class to do an emotion check. Students are already over-stressed and suffering from anxiety more than ever before. Adding an event like this to their world is tough, but being a good listener helps.

• Work hard to overcome biases. The football team and basketball teams have beloved, well-respected coaches that are now coming under fire. Many are nervous that these coaches will be implicated in the mishandling of sexual assault cases. It can be easy to get caught up in sensationalist headlines, but we must look at this objectively and not immediately jump on the national media hype-wagon, nor should we ignore it completely either.

• Facilitate conversations of what the next story will be and how to cover it. What are the long-term effects? How will enrollment suffer? How are donors and sponsors responding? How will the university alter a culture with systemic, deep-rooted problems?

• Tell students not to give up. As young journalists, they aren’t the first priority of sources returning calls. Don’t let them get discouraged.

• If a student is asked to be a source for local or national media, be cautious, but don’t dismiss it. Rachel Fradette, State News editor-in-chief. has been live on ESPN, CNN and NPR. She discussed their coverage and has given insight to what’s happening on campus. This kind of debrief is OK. Putting personal beliefs and biases into that would be detrimental to the journalist’s credibility. Fradette said she has to completely separate herself from being a student and to fully be a journalist.

• Encourage networking and learning opportunities from national and statewide media. East Lansing isn’t a place where we see national media on a regular basis. Work with them! Many will be happy to mentor young journalists. I have a friend who is a TV photojournalist for CNN. We took students down to the courthouse to meet him and his crew, see his gear and check out the satellite truck. The students loved this. Some professional journalists created a fund to help feed the State News staff during the sentencing.

• Be mindful of reporters who are covering too much testimony. Fradette said the State News developed a rule that if you covered one sentencing, you couldn’t cover a second one and no more than two consecutive days covering the hearing. “Many of the reporters have been covering (this) for about a year, and it’s hit the boiling point.”

• Don’t ignore the story and hope it goes away. Proceed with caution. Don’t discount a story that has the potential to be huge.
  

  Gould’s students meet with the CNN camera crew in Lansing to cover the Larry Nassar criminal case. Photo by Bob Gould.

Eric Carvin, social media editor Associated Press

With just a couple clicks, an erroneous tweet can evaporate.

If you spell a restaurant’s name wrong or quote a song lyric incorrectly on your personal account, it’s easy to quickly wash that bad tweet away and start again — no big deal.

News organizations and journalists tweeting on the job, however, don’t have that luxury.

Instead, editors say that news media must approach Twitter with the same ethical and accountability standards as anything else they produce. And that means owning — and promptly correcting — errors.

For Cassandra Garrison, social media and live-news editor at Thomson Reuters, correcting bad tweets is about transparency.

Cassandra Garrison, Thompson Reuters

“We feel strongly that we must correct ourselves quickly and openly, when it needs to be done,” she said. “We don’t believe that an incorrect tweet should just be deleted without any further comment. To us, that would be a lack of accountability.”

Eric Carvin, social media editor for Associated Press, agreed. “We need to make sure that when a mistake is made that it’s corrected and there’s transparency,” he said.

All of this is important, Garrison and Carvin contend, because Twitter has become a powerful resource for news outlets to push out their stories and break news.

“In the last 10 years, [Twitter] has really taken off as a consistent place for people to turn in urgent situations when they are in need of instant info,” Garrison said. “This makes it a perfect place for journalists and news orgs to have a space to communicate with their followers. It’s also when we see our biggest spikes on Reuters accounts — in times of breaking news when we are fastest with the information.”

Carvin said Twitter is a fast and immediate way to reach news audiences.

“Social [media] is a direct-to-customer experience,” he said.

At Reuters, Garrison said the Procedure is multi-layered.

“[We] issue another tweet announcing the correction [and] send it in the format which quotes the incorrect tweet so our followers can see what we are correcting for context. [Then, we] issue another tweet, this time quoting the correction, with the language: ‘Please see our correction. We will be deleting our incorrect tweet,’” she said.

“A few minutes later, we delete the original incorrect tweet. We will [retweet] the correction on all accounts that the incorrect tweet was shared through. This has been the most efficient way we have found to deal with corrections in the fast-moving world of Twitter.”

AP has a similar policy.

After the call is made by editors to correct a tweet, “we delete the tweet and immediately follow up with another tweet that explains that we deleted the earlier one and why,” Carvin said.

“And that notes that, in most cases, the replacement tweet is coming — and the wording of that is carefully approved internally. Then, we immediately follow up with the replacement tweet which does what the first tweet should have done.”

Just like with news stories, Twitter corrections can run the gamut from errors in quotes and incorrect figures to location clarifications and mislabeled photo attributions.

And that’s why Twitter corrections are handled with the same importance as any other correction.

“When we make a mistake, we must own it. We would do damage to our reputation if we were to cover our errors and not acknowledge them,” Garrison said. “In a climate where the media is constantly under the microscope, it is more important than ever to be transparent, especially on social media where millions of people around the world connect with our news instantly.”

“Accuracy is our bread and butter,” Carvin said. “We want people to walk away with the right information.”