"Fairness as a Virtue: Is Fairness Becoming More Difficult?" by Bob Giles., The Nieman Foundation

"Investigative journalism and ombudsmen" by Louis Wiley Jr., FRONTLINE

Wednesday morning, May 23

“Is There a Shared Watchdog Role for the Public, the Blogs & Ombudsmen?”

The consensus short answer, in the 8th session of the Organization of News Ombudsmen's 2007 Conference, was “a flat-out yes,” in the words of session moderatore Geneva Overholser of the Missouri School of Journalism and former ombudsmen of The Washington Post.

That sense was echoed by panelist and ONO member Jose Carlos Abrantes of the 140-year-old Povedor dos Leitores, Diario de Noticia of Lisbon, Portugal. “I am a blogger since 2002 -- five years,” he said. “And I have five blogs.”

Also on the panel, Buzzmachine blogger Jeff Jarvis said “The architecture of news is changing, because it can.” He added that “We're better off if we start to see stories as a process rather than a product,” and recommended asking beforehand, for example, what people want to know. News ombudsmen get saddled too much with mistakes, he said. “We should seek truth together.”

Self-described “The Blogger Guy,” Jarvis said he had become un-enamored of the term “citizen journalism” in favor of “networked journalism.” Seen that way, he said, the less stories become after-the-fact review, the more journalism gets done by more people, and more and better journalism gets done. “So it is more a pre-news than a post-news process,” he said.

The discussion of our newspapers is already out there, he said, and we need to find the means to link out to them and bring them in. “Yes there are Bozos out there. But also true and wonderful people.” Our job is to find smart people, good people, he said, adding that Editor Alan Rusbridger of The Guardian newspaper is correct about the need to find the software to do that.

Jarvis spoke of “the ethic of the link,” saying: “If you quote me, why not link to everything else I've said? Not everybody is going to read it. But if I say I was quoted out of context, well the context is there.”

He suggested a distinction between the institutional and the personal voice of the ombudsman. “Speaking on behalf of all the bloggers in the world,” he quipped, “we distrust the institutional voice and trust better the human voice. The more we represent that personal voice, the better.

Don't forget, he said, that the bloggers feel they have been shouting at a brick wall for centuries and nothing has happened, and that in reaching out to them it will be found that some will respect others and some will need their medication. “The rule is don't feed the trolls,” he said. “The bullies will back down and more will come down from the brick wall.”

To the question of whether a blogger is more the voice of the public than the ombudsman, Jarivis said that to have someone serve as the voice of the public was a necessary medium at one time but that that has changed: “I have my own voice. Reporters are supposed to ask questions that I want asked of authority. But I have a chance to ask too. You may become more an organizer than a funnel.”

As to whether he sees networked journalism eradicating traditional journalism? “Of course not,” he said, but the San Francisco Chronicle, which just laid off a quarter of its staff, as well as the Los Angeles Times and others, should have much earlier reorganized their staffs. “The role is vital” but has changed to enabler, vetter, more than anything a reporter, he said. “If you are going to enter into a conversation with the community, the best thing you can contribute is facts.” He advocated also soliciting those facts from, for example, the 1,000 people who can tell how computers are being used in a community's elementary schools.

Gina Lubrano, ONO executive secretary, observed that everything going on with the Internet, including the blogs, will make our role as ombudsmen more important, because with so much information out there and no time to read all these blogs we are the conduit for our readers. “I don't think our roles are being diminished by the Internet.” That role becomes “most favored voice,” said ESPN ombudsman Le Anne Schreiber.

On the matter of watchdogging, said Washington and Lee University ethics professor Edward Wasserman, the uniqueness of the ombudsman's contribution continues to be blowing the whistle from the perspective of the standards the organization sets for itself.

Still, “I hardly have time to go to the bathroom,” said Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell. “Start a blog?” Abrantes acknowledged that he is retired and has the time. Jarvis spoke of “the potential efficiencies if we make it a part of the process. Instead of responding to 600 letters, he said “a blog post is more efficient and adds to the conversation.”

Regarding the issue of how people will be able to distinguish between traditional media, there are many layers of this, Jarvis said. He cited a study in which only 30 percent of bloggers said they think they do anything related to journalism. “It's hearing people talk, what they think,” he said. “Another layer says if you're going to be involved, the standard is credibility. If you don't use your name, I'm not going to respect what you have to say as much, but I'm still going to let you say it.” There are a lot of people who want to help, he said, and there are a lot of people who think traditional journalists don't uphold their own standards.

Sometimes, he said, “You put up what you know and say this is what we don't know, what do you know?” He uses the Buzzmachine “to help us do that,” but prompted one comment from the audience: “Publish before you edit?”

Siobhain Butterworth, The Guardian's readers editor, said she sees “no difference between email, a telephone call or anything you read out there. It doesn't matter what the source is, it is the idea that is important,” and the idea can be verified and contextualized. Jarvis: “The more you hear, the better. The more you listen, the better.” There is no one view or voice of the public. “There are voices,” and you can improve your journalism by working cooperatively.

The blog becomes an alternate choice beyond the traditional column, Abrantes said. “The creative role of the public is very important today, he added. “Citizens are saying I am here, I have made a blog, I am expressing myself.” The shared role cited in the session's title, said Jarvis, is “A better informed society.”

“There's a glorious future if we can all be partners,” Overholser concluded. “It seems to me now more than ever that the ombudsman's role is a most important role. Somebody who knows the craft, is open, and has the quality of being able to say things that are important, substantial things. That's the role the ombudsman can perform, always informed by readers.”

-- C.B. Hanif, The Palm Beach Post

Tuesday afternoon, May 22

Peter was the executive producer/editor of “Media Watch” over the last seven years and is now the ABC Reuters Fellow at the Reuters Institute in Oxford doing a project on media accountability, responsibility an interaction between journalists and their audience.

Peter showed excerpts from two episodes, one focusing on a serious error by his own organization the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the other on a story that first appeared in The Sunday Times of London.

“Media Watch” can be downloaded to video IPods by visiting abc.net.au/mediawatch.

-- Karen Hunter, The Hartford Courant

Tuesday morning, May 22

The session dealt with the issue of challenging the news organizations ombuds and public editors work for and the impact of that.

Byrd: The whole idea of an ombuds is to improve the newspaper's credibility and accountability. All of us have failures. People who know what journalism is supposed to be about and are speaking to those issues adds to our credibility and accountability. Criticisms we hear have to do with different expectations. Also people coming from places we may or may not agree is appropriate, re. political bias.

The ombuds, creating dialogue in newsroom, hopefully informs the public about what we can expect from journalism. Ombuds are a part of the solution.

Pynn: Did you ever hesitate to criticize something due to the ongoing criticism?

Byrd: No, I actually thought it was my job. Those people had my ear. I was able to take into consideration what people thought were the flaws of the Washington Post.

Pynn: Having been out of journalism and now in government, what observations do you have about the Globe's government coverage?

Chacon: I would call for a multiple approach to covering government from the perspective of our living arts section, the business section. There are some creative ways it can be approached from suburban sections.

State politics and the red sox are two spectator sports in Boston. A lot of the Globe's reporters have been moving in this age of convergence. I think the audience would benefit from a multi-disciplinary approach.

Pynn: While in government, have you seen anything that you think, "Wow, the Globe should have covered that"

Chacon: A number of things have gone unreported. particularly during the campaign when I had the role of press secretary.

You really get a sense early on of who really works on a story and who doesn't work as much. Who comes in with a predetermined list of questions and conclusions and who really does the work. That's true for columnists and reporters.

Pynn: at a time when newspapers are shrinking is it prudent to take a chunk out of that hand?

Byrd: Newspapers that has an ombuds, ought to be willing to take whatever they get. the washington post plan is a fixed term. I didn't get any guidance from anyone and I wrote a lot of really stupid columns. i should have hired myself an editor outside my building. A luxury of having that level of independence.

A newspaper needs to have an ombuds that is as close as you can get to independent. Readers need to feel that it is a credible voice and that they can be heard and that there's someone in the corner paying attention. Readers are supposed to be the beneficiaries of this.. That means you have to bite that hand. I hope no one will lose their job for doing their job, which is to find flaws in the newspaper's coverage.

Pynn: How do you moderate that, my newspaper laid off 24 people. What advice would you have for people who may feel there jobs are threatened.

Byrd: I'm not convinced the ombuds should be first on the chopping block. It's a significant tool in connecting with readers. If there is no time like that time to make sure you are able to connect with readers in other ways. The ombudsman office, the ombudsman column and being part of the newsroom mix is of significant value to readers who are going to have to pay for the layoffs.

Chacon: The Globe still hasn't filled my position. The reader suffers for it. SOmeone is still answering the phone but no ombuds. Even though today the technology is such that readers can shoot an email to a reporter or editor. There is greater access. I still think what is missing is someone who can explain to readers what is going on. I would have explained to readers why the Globe has shut down its foreign bureuas. not having someone who can answer those questions, you run the risk of alienating readers. Not having an internal form of communication, the paper looses something.

Chacon: Another example of how poor newspapers are at covering their own personnel changes. A round of buyouts the Globe did, early on. In the column I talked about this particular issues. I listed the names, particularly those whose bylines appear in the paper. It was the kind of writers that people had establish relationships with. I also put their name on the blog. The Globe has gotten a little bit better about who takes those buyouts.

Michael Getler, former Wash Post ombud now in the same role for PBS: It's one of those things an ombuds is compelled to write about - Staff changes.

Pynn: what about the morale?

Byrd: I used to see people kind of making a broad path out of the room when I walked in. The approach I took was to act like a reporter. WHenever I was evaluating coverage, I talked to principals involved. THey knew what was coming and they could tell by my questions. I tried my best to give voice to their reasons in the story. If I disagreed with them that was part of it as well. What would be harder on morale if they had seen that I ambushed their work. I had the great benefit of being ombudsman no. 7 at the Post. All my predecessors taught the newsroom how to respond to the ombudsman. The Wash Post news staff was more accustomed to having some crab in the corner taking them on. We ended up doing more discussing of it than my just saying, "did you see this junky work."

Pynn: Did you refer to acts or the perpetrators.

Byrd: When I took on Bob Woodward, I used his name. And he used mine (laughs). It was more, "How do you decide what you cover and why, why would you make a decision to put that photograph in the paper as opposed to others that were available?"

Not an attack on any individual. Tried to raise issues that happens when we did or didn't raise a particular issue. I didn't send the column to people.

Chacon talking about the columns he wrote on the Globe and its relationship with the Red Sox: Readers had never been given a full explanation of the corporate relationship between the two. The Globe is owned by the New York Times which has an 18 percent share of the Red Sox. The Globe had also become very much a presence on the new England Sports Network. There was a relationship there. As I did more digging there became clear that there was a lot of unhappiness in the newsroom about this. People felt it might have an impact on the Globe's coverage of the Red Sox. I explained the relationship, explained to readers the relationship and further explained something that had never been reported. The publisher and the presidnet of the Globe both set on the owner's committee. As a result, everyone on the owner's committee got a big world series ring. I checked to see if there was a violation of the ethics policies. The public perception: having these rings could have a public effect.

In the second column, everyone who covered the red sox felt this extra burden and overcompensated as a result. the ny times which owns the globe discloses this. The Red Sox organization is a tremdendous local force, philantrophy, development, etc. It was by far the most difficult critique I had to make of the globe. It won me a lot of early love from the newsroom. they were glad someone finally explained to readers this burden. got me a lot new sources in the newsroom.

Byrd: One of the reasons the Washington Post plan does work is you can never work for the Washington Post again. Is there life after the ombuds job. There are people in this room who've been an ombuds for 20 years, I couldn't do it after 3. You can't go into this with the hope that this will make you an assistant managing editor at some point.

Chacon: One of my frustrations as the ombudsman was reporting on stuff that had already happened. So often the job was defined as reflecting what had already happened as opposed to influencing things before the story. Byrd: I think the Wash Post did what I told them to do once.. There is a great deal more that the ombudsman accomplishes that you can't check off.

Tim McNulty, public editor at the Chicago Tribune: I wrote about the amount of men vs. women in our obits, 70 percent were men. I think it raises consciousness and you can see it has an impact down the line.

Byrd: Some of the things I thought added to the discussion at the Wash Post, brown bag lunches that I had toward the end of my tenure. They were about race, how the Wash Post covers issues of race. The other was more general piece, the assumption that the paper is biased, liberal, also all the other biases. I thought that was valuable in part. A chance to have a face to face discussion where I could try to answer questions and pose questions to get more dialogue.

The second session Tuesday was entitled, "Looking back and looking forward" Gina Lubrano, former ombudsman, San Diego Union Tribune Henry McNulty, first ombudsman, Hartford Courant Gina reported that the Detroit News, Free Press, Orange County Register, Tennessean, The Fort Wayne News Sentinel, Delaware News Journal, Knoxville Journal, Honolulu Star, The Fresno Bee, The Patriot Ledger, The Philadelphia Inquirer, St. Louis Post Dispatch, Rocky Mountain News, Akron Beacon Journal, Ann Arbor News. Canada just appointed Karen English, to replace Sharon Burnside. Several Canadian papers no longer have ombuds.

Gina: When I first became ombuds, we joked about whether there was a life after ombuds. The Sun killed the column. When I first joined, many were older men who were finishing the careers. The point was, it was usually the last position. For a lot of you. Some you know will go on to other assignments. The last people who've left have gone on to be in their editorial departments. The job is changing quite a bit. Carol Goodhue is here. She has more duties that I did. She's a training editor. There's a move to the internet I really never really got into that. One of the things I really appreciated about the internet, most of my communication was through email, people would complain about a story, i could send it to them.

Henry McNulty, retired ombud for the Hartford Courant.

McNulty: There are eternal truths about the job, things I encountered 23 years ago they haven't changed.

McNulty said he is an avid follower of Karen Hunter's column in the Hartford paper and her blog, which offers almost instant feedback. Every Dec. 7 you'll hear that there wasn't enough about Pearl Harbor. Comments about the media's liberal bias, certain they will be around long after Rush Limbaugh. you will be continue to be lambasted every time you show a picture of someone in a safety situation. If you write about priests molesting children, you will be considered anti-catholic.

McNulty said in recent years, two trends have changed the job: more corporate ownership and the ever expanding influence of the internet is changing the job. Corporate ownership first, with each purchase, belts are tightened, staff reduced. Every time staff shrinks, so does coverage.

Computers are stealing readers and aren't giving them back. newspapers are in a desperate life and death struggle to maintain readers and get new ones.

Another complaint from readers come from the tendency to compete with internet style news, some but not all is shorter.

Check the web site for more details. Readers say: "if I wanted to read the paper on the internet I'd read it and i wouldn't spend $240 a year to buy the Courant.

McNulty went on to discuss the challenge of addressing things that concern all readers, in print and online, not just the older more established readers who have always called.

Online story commenting and blogs will help with this.

Louisville Courier-Journal public editor Pam Platt described something she began doing this year. She lets readers know when she will have a meeting, mostly at restaurants and coffee houses, and invites readers to come meet her and discuss the paper's coverage. She says the results have been very good and have prompted her to get some invites from schools and community groups.

Story level commenting is cutting down some. At USA Today, every story has a link to the reader rep as well as story level commenting so readers know they have a correction outlet. The Internet is changing the way readers interact with the newspaper.

-- Angela Tuck, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Monday afternoon, May 21

The second session of ONO’s conference looked at the struggles for press freedom in Russia and Turkey through the prism of the recent killings of two journalists, Russian reporter Anna Politkovskaya and Hrant Dink, who was the editor of the bilingual Turkish-Armenian newspaper Agos.

Politkovskaya, who was known for her writing about civilians caught in the Chechen conflict, was killed in the elevator of her apartment building in October 2006.

Andrei Richter, director at the Moscow Media Law & Policy Institute, noted that he would not consider “the murder of Anna Politkovskaya a benchmark in Russian journalism. It’s just a footnote.” He pointed out that the her death illustrated the hypocrisy of establishment media in Russia “in the very way the mainstream media reported her death. First, it was reported how dangerous it was to live in Moscow. The story was painted as crime story. Second, the deaths of Iraqi journalists were reported, which never happened before, to show how dangerous it is for journalists everywhere.”

He said self-censorship is a problem in Russia journalism. He said intimidation is used to control the media outlets in Russia.

Yavuz Baydar, of Sabah in Istanbul, said that since the death in January of Dink, his friend of 15 year, “Turkish journalism is showing signs of going back to square one.” Dink, was a controversial figure because of his advocacy for Armenians. In 2005, he was given a suspended sentence of six-months for violating Article 301 of Turkey’s penal code, which makes it a crime to insult Turkishness. Dink denied the charges.

His death sparked much protest in Turkey.

The struggles for press freedom in both countries continue.

-- Karen Hunter, The Hartford Courant

Monday morning, May 21

Bob Giles, curator of the Nieman Foundation, welcomed the group of ombuds from the United States and around the world. The Nieman Foundation's Walter Lippmann House is headquarters for the three-day conference.

He was followed on the program by Alan Rusbridger, editor of The Guardian, who spoke about "Ombudsmen in the Digital Future." Rusbridger's one-hour talk covered an array of issues relating to the need for ombudsmen and the resistance to having ombudsmen in news organizations. Among his points:

-- About the need for news ombuds .... the changing nature of editing, the sheer volume of online material generated by staff and users for which an editor is responsible, makes it impossible for an editor to monitor more than a fraction of what appears under the brand of the news organization (The Guardian now has nine platforms for news and information, he said); .... the trove of information available to readers allows them to quickly test the accuracy and bias of news reports, and if news organizations don't have the care and systems to air those concerns, or correct the record, they will take those concerns and post them elsewhere, and trust will be compromised; ... and media consolidation could limit the scrutiny of news organizations by each other.

-- About the resistence to having ombuds ... the loss of control having an ombud might present to an editor .... having an ombud challenges an editor's sense of omnipotence ... and it's not cheap.

Rusbridger said the days of "stone tablet journalism" are over, that the "entrails" of traditional or mainstream journalism are "being picked over by millions of bloggers." The Guardian editor said that means what we do, and what we write, still matters.

The new model of journalism is more fluid, and demands more transparency. Trust, he said, is the only thing in the end that we have going for us, and that calls for "a searching examination of what we mean by journalism." We need to be truthful about what we know in our reports, Rusbridger said, and we need to be truthful about what we don't know. The more "fluid, iterative" model is multi-layered: how things seem to us (journalists), the allowance that some readers or users will know more about a subject or know more, and an invitation to conversation or collaboration.

He returned to the subject of ombud as the hinge between the public and the editorial staff, and the call for real-time mediation what amounts to a revolution in how news is generated and presented.

In the course of his talk, he presented a number of examples of hyper-local, user-generated and crowd-sourcing sites, and afterward he fielded questions from attendees.

A full text of Rusbridger's remarks is posted here.

A letter from Ian Mayes, ONO president, was sent to his colleagues when he believed illness might prevent his attending his last conference as president. Unfortunately, he was not able to make it to Cambridge. We thank him for his leadership, we deeply regret that he is not here, and wish him very well in the very near future.

This report was filed directly from the 2007 conference of the Organization of News Ombudsmen at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass.