Journalism and Social Media: A Double Edged Sword

 Eric Steere

es581519@ohio.edu 

As time passes, technology prospers with discoveries and new developments. With this comes new ways to express your thoughts, emotions and other feelings someone may be feeling.

More specifically, however, there is more and more development in the realm of social media.

There has always been constant debate for if journalists and media reporters have the right to use social media, specifically in a more casual, opinionated setting. Some think it is biased or fake news, so it can't be trusted, but if it is frowned upon then people will think their rights of free speech and press are being taken away.

So where does the world stand? Do people feel as if journalists and reporters have a right express their true emotions on the internet, or should they keep to themselves and maintain a more professional appearance?

Source: sproutsocial.com 

Most people know that social media is just another creative outlet meant for the public's expression of personal thoughts, opinions or beliefs, and most owners of a device with internet access know this because they themselves actively use it. But journalists are also a part of that public, so they should be allowed to use it just as equally, right?

That is where the discussion gets complicated; for some background, according to the SPJ Code of Ethics, media professionals in big-time newsrooms are hired to seek truthful information and report it, be independent and be transparent to help better the greater public and minimize harm. While they are working they are doing just that, free from their own opinions on the matter.

While they are off the clock, media professionals of course stay up to date on current world events or other local news that applies to them. As fellow humans, they have a right to an opinion to everything.

Whether or not they choose to act or not on the matter is a different story.

Anything that a journalist might say in public or post on social media platforms is entirely on their own jurisdiction. In these cases, nobody is paying or asking someone to say anything specific. They are just giving their own opinion.

Which is totally fair.

Again, they are human like us, but they chose to make that decision, whether good or bad. As a professional in the field, they should have some good insight or background on what the impact or effect a single social media post, so they know whatever they say may go to represent themselves or any other relationship/connection they might have with others. The RTDNA Code of Ethics even states that their code doesn't dictate what someone should do in any given situation, rather it helps people make ethical better ethical decisions both for themselves as well as the communities they serve or represent. 

Therefore, I see social media in the field of journalism as a double-edged sword; some people fight for the rights to post freely online at the risk of saying something potentially harmful, whereas some people think professionals should stay off of the media, restricting them from being able to engage with the larger public and express their feelings.

There are pros and cons to either situation, but in my opinion, I believe people should have the right to choose to engage on social media or not. As professionals, they should be expected to understand the potential consequences of a public statement. In this way, people are still free to engage however much or little they may please, while still being held accountable for anything they might choose to say or do.