The Revolution in your Newsroom Writer: Jess Hill At the BBC’s Social Media Summit in London this May, journalists from around the world agreed that the biggest problem with social media is ‘verification’.  It’s good to hear journalists talking about verification. But for this conversation to be useful we need to be honest. The problem is not social media - in fact, Twitter, used systematically, is one of the best verification tools journalists have ever had. The problem is what the mainstream media has come to accept as ‘verified’ information. Journalists have long relied on ‘official’ and ‘expert’ sources for the bulk of their reporting. These sources may be officially ‘verified’, but media regularly publish their information without checking or unchallenging it. In short, journalists feel no compulsion to verify the ‘experts’. Armies of academics have analysed the media’s failure to question the reasons for going into Iraq. But have we learnt our lesson? Even after official sources are proven to have willfully misled the media, we continue to publish their statements as ‘verified’. On several occasions, NATO spokespeople have knowingly announced civilian deaths as militant deaths. How many times does this have to happen before we start publishing their reports as ‘unverified’? Ditto for government spokespeople the world round. Where do we draw the line? After all, verifying a source is just the first step. It’s the information that matters. It’s not our responsibility to relay the official line – it’s our job to interrogate it. And social media is making this aspect of interrogation faster than ever before. On platforms like Twitter and Facebook, journalists can now double-check statements from official sources with the help of thousands of people all over the world, from the mountains of Pakistan to the villages of the West Bank. These citizens are publishing videos, photos and eyewitness accounts from events as they happen, before government spokespeople get a chance to put their spin on them.  For the first time in history, the truth is getting halfway around the world before the lie can get its boots on.  At ABC Radio Current Affairs, we started collaborating with people on Twitter the day the revolution began in Libya. With the help of Libyan expats, we located and contacted an eyewitness in Benghazi who provided one of the first reports that Gaddafi was using African mercenaries against the Libyan people. Since then, we have developed extensive networks with people on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube in countries across the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Every day, these people alert us to breaking news, send information, help with finding eyewitnesses and contacts, and much more. We can also find articulate, English-speaking experts from almost every country in the world, so instead of relying on Western analysts, we preference local analysts who can give a local perspective. In journalism, the more things change the more they stay the same. Collaborating with people on social media is basically the same as working a beat. To begin with, you need to establish sources, and get to know them. On Twitter, I got started by introducing myself to people in specific countries who appeared influential and reliable – human rights activists, dissidents, journalists, bloggers and committed local citizens. Once I established contact, I began following them closely and communicating with them regularly, adding lesser-known sources they were communicating with. As with any source relationship, you need to earn their trust. I do this by keeping in touch with people, and feeding information back into the network. For example, back in March, when The World Today discovered that two senior Bahraini opposition figures had been arrested in the middle of the night, I posted that information immediately on Twitter, and fielded questions on what we knew about the arrests. Our account attracted about 100 Bahraini followers that morning, many of whom have fed us information and contacts ever since.  I also regularly help other journalists looking for information and contacts on Twitter, and have developed collaborative relationships with reporters all over the world.  This collaboration occurs daily on a range of projects. For example, when I heard that MediaWatch was looking for the origin of a video Reuters had sourced through social media, I asked my network to look into it. Within five minutes, I had a response from Lebanese activist @TrellaLB, who posted a link to the original video on YouTube. Reuters (and by association, SBS and ABC News 24), had got it wrong – it wasn’t Syria, it was Lebanon, and the video was three years old.  Working with people on social media is certainly not straightforward. There are serious verification challenges to grapple with.  You may have read about the Gay Girl in Damascus: the 40-year-old American man who masqueraded as a Syrian lesbian blogger, faked his own arrest and was then exposed by people on Twitter. There’s no foolproof way to avoid hoaxes; even the CIA is fooled from time to time. Where social media is concerned, however, there are precautions you can take.  Triangulation is key. If you see something newsworthy on Twitter, check to see if anyone else is reporting it. If not, proceed only with extreme caution, and request evidence to support the claim (photos, videos etc).  Don’t ever conduct interviews via email if you haven’t made phone contact first. The Guardian published email interviews with the Gay Girl in Damascus without establishing contact over the phone. If they can’t speak to you by phone or Skype, don’t report it.

Anonymous sources are another verification challenge on Twitter. Many of our Arab contacts insist on being anonymous, even when we’re speaking off-the-record (in countries like Libya and Syria, international phone calls are often monitored, and even Skype isn’t 100 per cent safe). In these cases, I focus on verifying their information. (After all, what difference does it make if you know their name is Mohammed?) When a source offered me an anonymous contact in Tripoli recently, I was extremely cautious. It’s very risky for people in Tripoli to speak to the media, and I hadn’t heard anyone from the capital interviewed in weeks. First, I checked the source with my network. The Twitter community takes self-regulation very seriously, and regularly exchanges information on who can or can’t be trusted. Then, after recording the interview, I uploaded the audio onto a website called Audioboo, and sent the link to one of the most high-profile Libyans on Twitter, who is in regular contact with friends and family in Tripoli. He assured me the information was accurate. Only then did we broadcast the interview on PM. As journalists, our first obligation is to the truth, and our first loyalty to the public. We should approach all sources with skepticism. By verifying official lines using tools like Twitter, we put spokespeople on notice: lie, and you’ll be found out.  Social media is paving the way for a better kind of journalism – one that doesn’t lecture its audience, but includes them in the process. By collaborating with people online, we can make our work more transparent, more trustworthy, and ultimately, more truthful.  View high resolution

The Revolution in your Newsroom

Writer: Jess Hill

At the BBC’s Social Media Summit in London this May, journalists from around the world agreed that the biggest problem with social media is ‘verification’. 

It’s good to hear journalists talking about verification. But for this conversation to be useful we need to be honest. The problem is not social media - in fact, Twitter, used systematically, is one of the best verification tools journalists have ever had. The problem is what the mainstream media has come to accept as ‘verified’ information.

Journalists have long relied on ‘official’ and ‘expert’ sources for the bulk of their reporting. These sources may be officially ‘verified’, but media regularly publish their information without checking or unchallenging it. In short, journalists feel no compulsion to verify the ‘experts’.

Armies of academics have analysed the media’s failure to question the reasons for going into Iraq. But have we learnt our lesson? Even after official sources are proven to have willfully misled the media, we continue to publish their statements as ‘verified’. On several occasions, NATO spokespeople have knowingly announced civilian deaths as militant deaths. How many times does this have to happen before we start publishing their reports as ‘unverified’? Ditto for government spokespeople the world round. Where do we draw the line?

After all, verifying a source is just the first step. It’s the information that matters. It’s not our responsibility to relay the official line – it’s our job to interrogate it. And social media is making this aspect of interrogation faster than ever before.

On platforms like Twitter and Facebook, journalists can now double-check statements from official sources with the help of thousands of people all over the world, from the mountains of Pakistan to the villages of the West Bank. These citizens are publishing videos, photos and eyewitness accounts from events as they happen, before government spokespeople get a chance to put their spin on them. 

For the first time in history, the truth is getting halfway around the world before the lie can get its boots on. 

At ABC Radio Current Affairs, we started collaborating with people on Twitter the day the revolution began in Libya. With the help of Libyan expats, we located and contacted an eyewitness in Benghazi who provided one of the first reports that Gaddafi was using African mercenaries against the Libyan people.

Since then, we have developed extensive networks with people on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube in countries across the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Every day, these people alert us to breaking news, send information, help with finding eyewitnesses and contacts, and much more. We can also find articulate, English-speaking experts from almost every country in the world, so instead of relying on Western analysts, we preference local analysts who can give a local perspective.

In journalism, the more things change the more they stay the same. Collaborating with people on social media is basically the same as working a beat. To begin with, you need to establish sources, and get to know them. On Twitter, I got started by introducing myself to people in specific countries who appeared influential and reliable – human rights activists, dissidents, journalists, bloggers and committed local citizens. Once I established contact, I began following them closely and communicating with them regularly, adding lesser-known sources they were communicating with.

As with any source relationship, you need to earn their trust. I do this by keeping in touch with people, and feeding information back into the network. For example, back in March, when The World Today discovered that two senior Bahraini opposition figures had been arrested in the middle of the night, I posted that information immediately on Twitter, and fielded questions on what we knew about the arrests. Our account attracted about 100 Bahraini followers that morning, many of whom have fed us information and contacts ever since. 

I also regularly help other journalists looking for information and contacts on Twitter, and have developed collaborative relationships with reporters all over the world. 

This collaboration occurs daily on a range of projects. For example, when I heard that MediaWatch was looking for the origin of a video Reuters had sourced through social media, I asked my network to look into it. Within five minutes, I had a response from Lebanese activist @TrellaLB, who posted a link to the original video on YouTube. Reuters (and by association, SBS and ABC News 24), had got it wrong – it wasn’t Syria, it was Lebanon, and the video was three years old. 

Working with people on social media is certainly not straightforward. There are serious verification challenges to grapple with. 

You may have read about the Gay Girl in Damascus: the 40-year-old American man who masqueraded as a Syrian lesbian blogger, faked his own arrest and was then exposed by people on Twitter. There’s no foolproof way to avoid hoaxes; even the CIA is fooled from time to time. Where social media is concerned, however, there are precautions you can take. 

Triangulation is key. If you see something newsworthy on Twitter, check to see if anyone else is reporting it. If not, proceed only with extreme caution, and request evidence to support the claim (photos, videos etc). 

Don’t ever conduct interviews via email if you haven’t made phone contact first. The Guardian published email interviews with the Gay Girl in Damascus without establishing contact over the phone. If they can’t speak to you by phone or Skype, don’t report it.

Anonymous sources are another verification challenge on Twitter. Many of our Arab contacts insist on being anonymous, even when we’re speaking off-the-record (in countries like Libya and Syria, international phone calls are often monitored, and even Skype isn’t 100 per cent safe). In these cases, I focus on verifying their information. (After all, what difference does it make if you know their name is Mohammed?)

When a source offered me an anonymous contact in Tripoli recently, I was extremely cautious. It’s very risky for people in Tripoli to speak to the media, and I hadn’t heard anyone from the capital interviewed in weeks.

First, I checked the source with my network. The Twitter community takes self-regulation very seriously, and regularly exchanges information on who can or can’t be trusted. Then, after recording the interview, I uploaded the audio onto a website called Audioboo, and sent the link to one of the most high-profile Libyans on Twitter, who is in regular contact with friends and family in Tripoli. He assured me the information was accurate. Only then did we broadcast the interview on PM.

As journalists, our first obligation is to the truth, and our first loyalty to the public. We should approach all sources with skepticism. By verifying official lines using tools like Twitter, we put spokespeople on notice: lie, and you’ll be found out. 

Social media is paving the way for a better kind of journalism – one that doesn’t lecture its audience, but includes them in the process. By collaborating with people online, we can make our work more transparent, more trustworthy, and ultimately, more truthful.