Skip to main content
University of Wisconsin–Madison

Author: Madeleine Bair

How to teach the ethics of using eyewitness video

When journalism students visit our offices at WITNESS to learn about video and human rights advocacy, the most common questions we hear are on the ethics of using eyewitness footage: How do you verify a video you find online? How do you know if a video is “verified” and if you can use it in your story? When and how would you use videos made by terrorist groups in a report?

As a human rights organization dedicated to using video as a tool for advocacy, these are questions we and our partners wrestle with every day. Increasingly, video documenting human rights abuse is filmed not by professionals but by average bystanders who have never been trained on issues like informed consent or by organizations aiming to spark fear or groups attempting to spread misinformation.

When such videos surface as part of a news story or a human rights investigation, what is a journalist or advocate to do with them? How do we apply the traditional codes of ethics when using footage we ourselves did not produce (often described as “user-generated content,” “UGC” or “citizen video”)?

It’s not surprising these questions are what young professionals want to talk about. Eyewitness videos are not only a central part of news reporting today, but a common element in social media channels. Addressing the ethics of using eyewitness footage provides students with a lesson that is immediately relevant to their own practices as consumers, creators and curators of information.

Yet, guidance on the ethics of using eyewitness footage hasn’t caught up with its importance as a reporting tool. WITNESS’s Ethical Guidelines for using Eyewitness Videos in Human Rights Reporting and Advocacy was created to begin to fill that gap.

Considering the stakeholders of eyewitness footage

WITNESS’ guidelines were written to help reporters, producers and advocates think through who could be affected by sharing eyewitness footage, and how to minimize potential harm to those people. After all, ethical mishaps are often the result of a lack of information. In the case of eyewitness footage, many reporters or producers simply don’t know what questions to ask about the footage and haven’t had a chance to consider the potential consequences of sharing it with a wider audience.

The guide is organized in three sections depending on the stakeholders of the footage. When teaching the ethics of using eyewitness footage, this is a good place to start. For any video, the central questions you’ll want to think through are:

  • Who are the stakeholders?
  • How could they be potentially harmed by the footage?
  • How could you as a journalist minimize potential harm?

You might be asking, why “stakeholders”? Why not just “filmers”? Or “subjects”?

When using eyewitness footage, there are a number of different people who could be affected by its distribution. First of all, there are those on camera. You don’t necessarily know if they consented to being filmed or even knew that they were on camera. Finding themselves on the evening news could change their lives forever. Depending on the nature of the footage, it could put them at risk of humiliation, harassment or worse.

Other stakeholders include those who filmed the footage and those who shared it. (Often this is the same person, but it could be different people with distinct objectives). Did they realize they were sharing it publicly? Could the footage put them at risk due to the nature of the footage? Are they aware of the consequences of attaching their identity to the footage, and did they take steps to protect their identity (such as sharing it on a new YouTube account without their name on it)?

If someone uploaded a video to their Facebook page, they may only expect their circle of friends to see it. We’ve seen several headline news cases involving eyewitness footage in which the filmer later expressed regret for associating their name with the footage (such as the bystander who filmed the chokehold death of Eric Garner in Staten Island). The safety of those who provide newsworthy footage is critical for journalists to consider.

Finally, stakeholders include the audience. What are the potential consequences of sharing footage that may turn out to have been disseminated as part of a misinformation campaign or a hate group? What sort of footage would warrant a warning to viewers about its graphic nature? How can a journalist share footage responsibly when it has not been independently verified?

How to teach the ethics of eyewitness footage

Our ethical guidelines don’t provide answers to these scenarios, but rather sets of questions to help reporters identify and address ethical challenges that can easily fall through the cracks.

In your classroom, you can find an example from the week’s news, from your community or from a class project, and use these checklists as a starting point for a discussion on the ethics of reporting with eyewitness footage.




If you are searching for examples for discussion, you can find several from around the world in WITNESS’ Ethical Guidelines. The Eyewitness Media Hub’s Medium channel is another great source of case studies illustrating how eyewitness footage used in the media inadvertently affected the people behind the footage.

More Resources

For much more on the ethics of using eyewitness footage in reporting, check out our blog series tackling a different aspect of the topic each week. The Eyewitness Media Hub, First Draft News and the ONA’s Build Your Own Ethics Code are other fantastic resources for guidance, tools and case studies on using eyewitness videos in reporting.

How do you discuss the ethics of using eyewitness video to journalism students, and what has been particularly challenging or successful? What resources would you recommend? We look forward to hearing from your experience in the comments below.

Madeleine Bair leads the WITNESS Media Lab at WITNESS where she examines how eyewitness video can be used safely, ethically, and effectively for human rights reporting and advocacy. Follow her on Twitter @madbair and follow WITNESS at @WITNESSorg. WITNESS Program Coordinator Sarah Kerr also contributed to this post.

This post originally published at MediaShift. Reposted here with permission.

How Gannett used engaged ethics to help kids in crisis

I still remember the feeling I had when I read the first lines of the story.

“The mics are off and the lenses capped,” reporter Rory Linnane wrote. “We’re wrapping up the interview, getting ready to shake hands and head out, when Angela Wesener grabs a photo album off the shelf and perches beside me on an ottoman in her family’s living room.

“We’ve both been crying.”

I immediately felt I was getting something different from the investigative and daily reporting I was used to from Linnane, a stellar young reporter I first met as a student in my class in 2010.

And indeed I was. I had landed on a story in “Rory’s Diary,” a gripping and novel element of a months-long series by USA Today Network-Wisconsin, delving into the state’s youth mental health crisis. In the diary, Linnane opens a window for readers into the reporting and the people behind the stories. She talks about her emotions, how her sources are affecting her and what the state’s elevated teen suicide rate costs us.

And she says that every time she does this, she feels uncomfortable — she was talking about herself, not something reporters often do.

Despite that discomfort, the Kids in Crisis series marks an interesting turn for USA Today Network-Wisconsin and maybe for journalism ethics overall. In many of their choices, the reporters and editors on the series embraced engaged ethics — drawing communities in closer rather than keeping them at arm’s length. Shunning a traditional — and often lifeless — view of journalistic objectivity, the team chose openness, transparency and a certain form of advocacy. Their sources and audiences seem glad they did.

A Project Idea from an Engaged Approach

USA Today Network-Wisconsin, formerly known as Gannett Wisconsin Media, includes daily publications in 10 cities, ranging in size from Wisconsin Rapids at 18,000 people to Green Bay at 105,000, plus smaller weeklies. The network employees 135 journalists in the daily newsrooms, plus another 15 at weekly publications. In the model USA Today Network is using, the individual news organizations cover community issues and activities locally. But they also cooperate across the organization to do bigger projects with statewide implications.

When Pam Henson, president of USA Today Network-Wisconsin, arrived in spring 2015, she spent 6 months traveling and meeting with people to learn what issues matter in the communities they cover. Jim Fitzhenry, the network’s state business development director, said Henson kept hearing over and over again about teen suicide. After some initial reporting showed the state’s teen suicide rate was about a third higher than the national average, Fitzhenry invited staffers across the network to pitch story ideas from their communities. As soon as he saw them, he was convinced consistent themes across all these areas meant they needed to do a major project, expanding their scope from suicide to youth mental health broadly.

The series launched in January with three main phases. The first chapter explored the state’s challenges and why its kids are dying at higher rates than in other states. The second covered possible solutions to the crisis, asking what ideas and initiatives could help turn the situation around. The final chapter called the state to action and involved town hall meetings in all 10 areas USA Today Network-Wisconsin covers, plus a Day of Action in the state capital.

The Kids in Crisis efforts included town hall meetings and a Day of Action in Madison, the state's capital. (Photo by Katy Culver)

The Kids in Crisis efforts included town hall meetings and a Day of Action in Madison, the state’s capital. (Photo by Katy Culver)

An open window on reporting

Throughout it all, Rory’s Diary was the common thread woven through all the elements. The at-times heartbreaking stories have a more human side to them because the audience sees behind the reporting. Take the diary entry on Angela Wesener.

“The loss of a child is unimaginable to those who haven’t experienced it,” Linnane writes. “But it’s human nature to try. Etched in my memory is an image of my friend’s mom draped over his casket, unmoving, desperate to hold onto her moment of goodbye to her lost son.”

The entry accompanies a more traditional piece about the the interplay of bullying and teen suicide and a video showing how losing a compassionate boy named Jonathan forever changed a family.

Linnane says transparency was critically important in getting her past her discomfort. She felt that while she was letting the audience know what she was thinking and feeling in her reporting, she wasn’t telling them what to think or how to feel.

“People understood exactly where I was coming from, and when they read the stories I reported on, they knew my perspective but could come to their own conclusions.”

Flawed ideas of objectivity

This engaged approach to ethics marks a departure from some traditional practices, a welcome change for the Wisconsin network’s vice president for news, Joel Christopher. He supports the role of journalists as neutral observes but argues that idea can get twisted and portray news organizations as separate and apart from the communities they serve.

“You’ve got to give people more than just this drumbeat of critical looks at the places that they live in or the organizations that they’re a part of,” Christopher says, emphasizing news media can facilitate needed change in society. “We want to make sure stakeholders are connected as effectively as possible to effect change.”

He says USA Today Network-Wisconsin purposely chose to challenge traditional notions of objectivity and distance in reporting and producing the series.

“I think sometimes there’s a mindset that objectivity completely removes a journalist from the world that he or she covers, and I think that’s mistaken thinking,” Christopher says. “The idea that journalists aren’t able to make objective decisions yet still retain some humanity? It’s a false choice, and I think that a lot of times we use that to actually avoid interaction with people because we didn’t want them to have a front-row seat to how we created the journalism.”

By embracing new forms of engagement, including the town hall meetings, the journalists on the series better represented the publics they serve, he argues.

“Audiences demand, rightfully so, that there’s some access to the people who are providing their news, and they want to see that there is an investment and a buy-in from the journalists.”

Andrew DeVigal, chair in journalism innovation and civic engagement in the University of Oregon’s School of Journalism and Communication, said embracing engagement recognizes that news organizations are no longer the powerful community gatekeepers they once were. He sees this shift in mindset as critical but often overlooked.

“In our radically connected world, I think community members being able to tell their own stories is already happening,” he says. “The more we distance from that fact — the more that we deny that that’s already happening — the less relevant we become as news organizations to the communities we’re supposed to serve. Our roles are changing within the public we are serving.”

Strong Response

The public noticed. In addition to the more than 1,000 people attending the town halls and Day of Action in person, livestream and archived video also saw strong performance. The series drew half-a-million page views in its initial months. But most importantly for Linnane, families affected by youth mental health issues consistently told her how much the series and her approach meant to them.

Archived video from USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin's engagement efforts is available online. (Screenshot of Post-Crescent)

Archived video from USA Today Network-Wisconsin’s engagement efforts is available online. (Screenshot of Post-Crescent)

Michael Newton, a University of Wisconsin-Madison police officer and mental health advocate, says work like this goes a long way toward transforming the stigmas attached to mental health and helping the public see this for what it is: a public health issue.

“Somehow along the way, people have forgotten that this is an illness,” Newton says. “The fact that these journalists were engaging the community and trying to find solutions was inspiring and energizing.”

Fitzhenry sees potential for their approach to work with other issues of public importance, such as substance abuse or drunk driving. “We were able to bring together people who would never get into the same room. There were connections there that were very powerful,” he says. “People were hungry for those connections. It goes back to a basic sense of democracy. Having an exchange of ideas and knowledge is very powerful and people are interested.”

Kathleen Bartzen Culver (@kbculver) is an assistant professor in the School of Journalism & Mass Communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, teaching and researching at the intersection of ethics and digital media practices. Culver also serves as director of the Center for Journalism Ethics and education curator for MediaShift.

This post originally published at MediaShift. Reposted here with permission.

Founding director wins Tankard Book Award

Stephen J. A. Ward has been awarded the 2016 Tankard Book Award for his book Radical Media Ethics: A Global Approach. The award recognizes the best academic book in journalism and mass communication each year.

Ward founded the Center for Journalism Ethics in 2008 and served as the first James E. Burgess Chair of Journalism Ethics in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at UW-Madison.


Why we’re moving forward with realism, yet optimism

A message from the Center’s new director, Katy Culver

As I take the reins as director of the Center for Journalism Ethics, I’m finding great meaning in assuming this role during graduation season at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I look at the young people leaving our program and heading out into the world, and I’m optimistic about the future of journalism and the ethical practice of it.

This is not to say both the news business and its standards don’t face challenges today. I haven’t been hiding under a rock. I see clearly that business models are strained, attacks on press freedom are abundant, and truth is a concept eluding some politicians and their supporters.

Yet just this week, one of my young graduates published work that reminds me of the tremendous promise of journalism and how our digital age affords creative ways of doing this critical work. Alison Dirr is a crime and justice reporter at the Post-Crescent in Appleton, Wisconsin. Back when I rode my dinosaur to graduation, that would have meant covering the community for local readers of a print edition.

For Dirr, it still means that. But because the Post-Crescent is owned by Gannett and now a part of the USA Today Network, it also means she had vastly expanded reporting capacity this week as she covered some local school closings in response to bomb threats. Using the brand new – and thoroughly exciting – USAT Network model, she was able to discover that these threats were part of a nationwide wave, wrought by automated calls in at least 18 states. The Appleton community was alerted to its threats and closures. But her reporting took on importance of national scope.

I know the public’s trust in “the media” is low. I think work like Dirr’s helps build that trust. It demonstrates to our fellow citizens that when something affects our community, we will investigate it and inform them.

The truth is this: Journalism likely has never faced the significant and sustained challenges it faces today. Yet the journalism itself has likely never been better. And citizens have likely never needed deep, verified, courageous and sustained journalism more.

When truth is threatened, democracy is on the line. Journalists are our front-line defenders of truth.

Do some get it wrong? Of course. Sometimes for the worst of all reasons – ego, competition or a misguided need to be fast instead of accurate. But other times simply because we’re human.

A few years back, a city editor at a local paper asked me if I thought it was ethical to encourage kids to go into a business under so much strain. His shrinking newsroom, he said, was not a happy place to be.

After I recovered from the momentary stun of the cynicism of that question, I responded that I couldn’t imagine giving anything less than my full-throated encouragement to any young person who thinks of doing this work. They aren’t going to make a fat salary doing it, but they have options in local newsrooms, new digital models, and innovative efforts by national and international organizations. It would unethical to discourage them – both for their own interests and those of the citizens they will one day serve.

I’m glad I’m not alone in that view, as Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan vividly demonstrated this week.

I look forward to the Center for Journalism Ethics playing a role in encouraging the kind of journalism citizens need. In part this means championing important journalistic work that demonstrates valuable ethical practice. In part that means bringing journalism’s failures to light, a sometimes-uncomfortable yet absolutely central task. And finally, in part it means sharing information and insights to improve journalistic practices and to help the public have a voice in the things we do.

It’s been my privilege to be a part of this Center for its first eight years, and it’s now my honor to lead it into its next phase. I come to this challenge with realism, but also with optimism. I see the future of journalism in my classes each day, and it looks quite bright to me.

Photo by Bryce Richter/UW-Madison

AP team accepts Shadid award

The enslaved men interviewed wanted so badly to let their families know they were alive that they wanted reporters to use their names and faces.

But, the reporters knew their sources could be killed for talking.

This dilemma soon became how to best tell the story of slavery without endangering their sources.

“We had to make a decision for them, and whether we were going to put brave men in danger,” Robin McDowell, one of the reporters, said. “Do we take away power of the story that they so bravely chose to tell, and weaken it?”

McDowell and Martha Mendoza accepted Friday the 2016 Anthony Shadid Award for Journalism Ethics at a ceremony. Esther Htusan and Margie Mason were also part of the reporting team on “Seafood from Slaves,” which uncovered slavery within Southeast Asia’s fishing industry. The also was awarded the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for in Public Service.

The Shadid award, which is presented by the Center for Journalism Ethics, each year recognizes stories that maintain high ethical standards while serving the public interest. The award is named in memory of Shadid, an alumni who died in Syria while reporting for the New York Times.

Shadid committee chair Jack Mitchell said the winning story exemplified careful, ethical journalism.

“Good journalism is journalism that worries about what stories will mean to those who are involved in the story,” he said.

Focusing on those involved in the story was central to the AP’s reporting. As the team told the stories of men who were kidnapped and tricked into slavery, they knew it was important to protect their sources. Mendoza said they called their editors and presented them with their limited options. They could not blur the faces because it is against the AP’s guideliness. They could use silhouette footage, which wouldn’t show the desperation of the men’s faces. Or, they could try to free their sources.

“The editors were rather swift, and said, ‘Well, that sounds like the best plan, do you think so? Yeah, that sounds like the best plan,’” Mendoza said. “I could hear the other reporters breathing across the line, and they were like ‘Uh, so guys, what do you know about freeing slaves?’”

The women then got in touch with contacts in immigration services, and freed the men who helped them tell their story.

The awareness created by the story has freed even more slaves, led to dozens of arrests, seized millions of dollars of seafood and alerted the U. S. Congress to loopholes in federal laws that have allowed slave produced seafood to end up on American plates.

While the story exposed corruption within the industry, there is still much to be done, according to McDowell.

“We’re very happy with the impact our story has had, but it hasn’t scratched the industry as a whole,” McDowell said. “On the corporate end, Whole Foods, Walmart, and Red Lobster have done little to nothing in response.”

Throughout writing the story, Mendoza said the team of reporters had many ethical conversations with their editors, as they were concerned whether the story was becoming one of advocacy journalism.

“When we went to our editors and said this might be happening, the answer was: ‘If you think there are slaves there you have a moral imperative to go look,’” Mendoza said.

While their editors decided it was ethical to advocate against human trafficking, they didn’t allow Mendoza to accept invitations to Congress or the Vatican. Accepting these invitations would put her in a position of advising policy, she said.

The impact of the story on the industry contributed to its Pulitzer Prize win last month. But, McDowell and Mendoza, both of whom had worked with Shadid at the Associated Press, said the this award meant more to them.

“You know, they say Pulitzer Prize is one of those things that goes on your obituary,” Mendoza said. “But fighting for ethics like this, in a company the size of ours is a discussion and a challenge, and it’s definitely what Anthony would be all about.”

Carly Schesel, originally from Chippewa Falls, is a sophomore double majoring in journalism and political science.

Education and race panel addresses timely ethical issues

Nikole Hannah-Jones, a writer for New York Times Magazine, said it is ethically imperative that re-segregation of America schools should be on the radar of every education reporter in America.

“The ethical implication is an ethical failure,” Hannah-Jones said. “I don’t understand how one can write about education and not write about these racial issues.”

Hannah-Jones and other panelists at “Race, Ethnicity and Journalism Ethics” conference agreed April 29 that journalists have a responsibility to cover racial disparities and make the public aware about its problems.

The panel Hannah-Jones sat on was one of four panels that discussed the ethical obligations of news organizations to cover and engage with race. The theme chosen for the eighth annual conference of the Center for Journalism Ethics was particularly timely because of the racial issues and demonstrations on the UW-Madison campus during the past year.

Panelists and moderators argued that the traditional views of objectivity and fairness in covering racial issues is often problematic. Several panelists acknowledged that while it is impossible to be completely objective, reporters should go into stories aware of their own biases and try not to make up their mind about a story first.

Hannah-Jones said although racial issues can be an emotional topic, good reporting should be rooted in evidence. If a story is based on verifiable facts, no one can claim it is unfair, she said.

A student-led social media campaign in the past month that uses the moniker #TheRealUW shed light on the racism and discrimination minority students face and has received wider news media coverage.

Kiara Childs, a student of color at UW-Madison, said that these racial events on campus are traumatizing because they make minority students feel unwelcome in the place where they live and attend classes.

Childs said that reporters add to the problem by avoiding the truth when covering racial issues.

“I think some reporters have a romantic view of this university and don’t fully understand the depth of the terrible racial climate on campus,” Childs said. “Reporters have ethical codes to follow, but they also hold biases.”

Childs agreed with panelists who said that a good way for journalists to improve their coverage of racial dynamics is to do their research on race and inequality.

Lisa Gartner, who won the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for local reporting at the Tampa Bay Times, said journalists should get out and talk to people who are affected by these issues.

Childs said Madison reporters can learn from #TheRealUW to understand the group’s mission the problems it’s trying to address.

The racial issues in education are real, and should not be dismissed by the news media, she said.

“Equality on this campus is important for all,” Childs said. “Reporters have a voice to work toward that.”

Maggie Baruffi, originally from Kenosha, is a junior at UW-Madison studying reporting and strategic communication. She is in Prof. Stephen Vaughn’s Intermediate Reporting class this Spring. 

Photo of Nikole Hannah-Jones by

Join us for live web streaming during the conference

To find the live stream, choose the current panel from the schedule below.

8:50 Opening remarks
9 Keynote address
(not available for live streaming)
Nikole Hannah-Jones New York Times Magazine
10 Panel — Representing Race: Language, Imagery, Sources and Issues for Journalists Sue Robinson, moderator UW-Madison SJMC
Henry Sanders Madison365
Patty Loew UW-Madison Life Sciences Communication
Alan Gomez USA Today
11:15 Panel — Education Matters: Covering Racial Dynamics and Examining Journalism’s Role Rachelle Winkle-Wagner, moderator UW-Madison Education Leadership and Policy Analysis
Sue Robinson UW-Madison SJMC
Nikole Hannah-Jones New York Times Magazine
Lisa Gartner Tampa Bay Times
12:15 Lunch
12:45 Shadid award presentation Jack Mitchell, Shadid committee chair UW-Madison SJMC
Nada Shadid, award presenter
Robin McDowell Associated Press
Martha Mendoza Associated Press
1:45 Panel — Questions of Justice: Crime, Inequality and News Media Hemant Shah, moderator UW-Madison SJMC
Katy Culver UW-Madison SJMC
Mike Koval Madison Police Department
Matt Braunginn Young, Gifted and Black
Jaweed Kaleem Los Angeles Times
3:15 Plenary Session — Tomorrow’s Work: Moving Forward on Race and Journalism Keith Woods, moderator NPR
Maria Len-Rios University of Georgia
Brent Jones USA Today
4:30 Closing remarks

Please join us online today for a full complement of live coverage of the conference, including:

  • streaming video
  • Twitter and Instagram feed at #uwethics
  • opportunity to ask questions of the panels
  • links and other resources
  • archival coverage of past conferences

View the program book

Preview program book

The program book for Friday’s conference Race, Ethnicity and Journalism Ethics is available for preview.

Inside you’ll find the day’s schedule, speaker biographies, and sponsor information.

Check out the program before you come to Union South or use it to follow along from home while you watch our live stream of the panels.

2016 cover art

2016 cover

3 winners of 2016 Pulitzer Prizes to speak at conference

Journalists from two reporting teams who earned Pulitzer Prizes Monday will participate in the Center for Journalism Ethics conference April 29.

The conference – Race, Ethnicity and Journalism Ethics – will explore critical questions surrounding how journalists reflect and represent racial diversity through news coverage.

One important intersection between news and race involves coverage of education. Lisa Gartner of the Tampa Bay Times will discuss her team’s “Failure Factories” series, which earned a 2016 Pulitzer for Local Reporting. The series explored political decisions that resulted in degradation of a county’s schools, with disastrous consequences for black students.

An Associated Press team of journalists won the 2016 Pulitzer for Public Service for a deep investigation into slave labor in the international seafood trade. The team’s careful consideration of risk and ethical choices in reporting also earned them the Center’s Anthony Shadid Award for Journalism Ethics. Reporters Martha Mendoza and Robin McDowell will receive the award on behalf of the entire team and reflect on their reporting and decision-making during a luncheon session at the conference.

Online registration for the conference, which includes the luncheon, is open through Friday, April 22. Visit to register.

In addition to these prize-winning journalists, 15 expert panelists are on board to address key questions through four panels.

  • Representing Race: Language, Imagery, Sources and Issues for Journalists
  • Education Matters: Covering Racial Dynamics and Examining Journalism’s Role
  • Questions of Justice: Crime, Inequality and News Media
  • Tomorrow’s Work: Moving Forward on Race and Journalism

The panelists will join Nikole Hannah-Jones, who will deliver the keynote address at 9 a.m. Hannah-Jones reports on racial injustice for the New York Times Magazine and recently won a George Polk Award for a “This American Life” series on school integration and resistance to it.

The conference is supported by generous donations from the Gannett Foundation, the Evjue Foundation, the Wisconsin State Journal, the Ethics & Excellence in Journalism Foundation, WPS Health Solutions, the Wisconsin Broadcasters Association and the Wisconsin Newspaper Association.

This is the eighth annual conference of the Center of Journalism Ethics, housed in UW-Madison’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication. Founded in 2008, the Center’s mission is to foster vigorous debate about ethical practices in journalism and provide a resource for producers, consumers and students of journalism.

For a full slate of panelists and registration information, visit

Online conference registration is here.

Read more about the conference.

This post was updated April 20.