(photo: flickr/Jorge Felipe Gonzalez CC: BY-NC-SA)

Journalists and editors make mistakes no matter how careful they are. It’s standard to publish a printed correction when the error’s in a newspaper article. In the online world though, there’s less consensus on how to handle corrections and clarifications. Some media organizations simply make errors vanish by deleting them and clicking on the ‘update’ button. Others say that this isn’t enough and publishing a correction note is the only ethical option. onMedia’s Kyle James looks at best practices around correcting online errors and mistakes.

Making corrections is crucial

Getting things right and being transparent about our work are integral parts of being a journalist. If we are unconcerned about the accuracy of what we publish, we might as well be writing fiction. But we’re not. We’re recording and analyzing events and developments in the real world. We need to be as true to the facts as we can be.

(photo: flickr/Terrance Heath CC: BY-NC)

But we’ll inevitably get something wrong at some point. Maybe it’s a small error, such as a misspelling of a name. It might be a little bigger, like an incorrect percentage in a business story. Or maybe it’s a huge error, like Rolling Stone magazine’s explosive article from Nov. 2014 about a rape on campus that fell apart under closer examination.

Good journalists and quality journalism outlets live and die by their credibility. If a serious news agency is seen as playing fast and easy with the truth, it’s likely to lose some of its audience.

It’s a violation of what Craig Silverman, the editor of the excellent and often funny blog Regret The Error, calls the “contract of correction,” which has existed between newspapers and readers for hundreds of years. This informal contract says that journalists will do everything they can to verify what they report and will correct errors as soon as possible and in a fair manner.

And surprisingly, admitting mistakes can make a media outlet appear more credible. A 1998 survey by the American Society of News Editors found nearly two thirds of newspaper readers “felt better” about a paper when they saw corrections.

Errors in the online world

The rise of digital and social media has brought a new set of issues around corrections and there’s still no real standard or approach to setting the record straight.

Some media organizations still question if pointing out an error in a story online is even necessary. Why not just correct it, hit the update button and keep quiet? Or, if a story is so riddled with errors or its very foundation is incorrect, why not just unpublish it, pull it off the page and pretend it never existed?

But while yesterday’s errors disappear with yesterday’s newspaper in the print world, the online world is more permanent. It can be very difficult, or even impossible, to completely delete wrong information posted on the web. Think of shared articles, cached webpages and screen shots. Errors, even those corrected soon after the fact, might have already traveled around the globe.

Social media presents even more chances for errors to spread like wildfire, making it hard to correct posts or tweets with errors in them once they’ve been shared a dozen or a thousand times.

Broadcasting giant CNN got in hot water when it put out incorrect information about an important US Supreme Court ruling on the air, online and on Twitter. It took the network 13 minutes to issue a correction of its first tweet, which by then had been retweeted more than a thousand times. Check out a full run-down of the fiasco here.

Some best-practice tips

Here are a few things to consider when it comes to rectifying wrongs at your own digital platform.

• Correct all factual errors in digital content as quickly as possible – although there is no time limit on making things right.
• When errors in digital content are found, add a clearly visible ‘correction note’ to the article to tell readers that the material was changed from a previously published version and give details about what was corrected. For example: “An earlier version of this article miscalculated the percentage rise in unemployment from 2013 to 2014. It should be 1.2 percent, not 2.4 percent as originally stated.”
• Think about proper placement of your correction note. If the error is serious, it might be good to displace the correction at the top of content. Otherwise, many online outlets place their notes at the end of the article.
• If it’s a simple typo or a grammatical error and correcting the error doesn’t alter the meaning of the story in any wy, it might not warrant a note. But almost everything else does.
• When corrections are made in a breaking news story where facts are emerging over time, be transparent about what you know, when you know it, and how you know it.
• Make it easier for audiences to point out possible mistakes in digital content. The Toronto Star puts a “Report an Error” link on most stories. But before changing digital content, any error reports from the public need to be verified.
• Avoid deleting an entire article by ‘unpublishing’ it if errors are discovered. It makes you seem like you’re hiding something. If there are major problems with a story, however, there may be legal reasons to take it down. Discuss this with editors and legal counsel and if a story is taken down, an editor’s note should explain why. (Rolling Stone magazine didn’t take down its widely discredited story on university campus rape. But they did put a long, four-paragraph explanation of the issues above the online version.)
• If erroneous information goes out via social media, audiences should be informed through those same channels as soon as the error is found. And, due to the nature of these platforms, it’s best to send out multiple correction tweets and status updates.
• Apply the same standards to all platforms – online, mobile, video and audio content as well as text.
• It might be worth considering a dedicated corrections and clarifications page (see what theguardian.com does for an example).

A New York Times correction appended to the end of an online article

Written by Kyle James, edited by Kate Hairsine

RELATED ONMEDIA POSTS 
How journalists can edit their own work
Online comments are being shut down

List.ly makes lists with a twist. It’s a web tool that lets you make collaborative lists. Think of them as interactive or living lists. A list generated in Listly doesn’t stay rigid or static. Users can not only view and share the list, but they can also add to it and give the list a ranking.

Listly recently integrated Twitter lists to its service. That’s what caught our eye. A public Twitter list remains useful when new sources are added and redundant ones “pruned”. Potentially, Listly could help make Twitter lists not only more useful in newsrooms but also offer a form of social media content that could attract a larger audience.

For example, if you’re covering a particular beat, such as arts and culture in your city, you could generate a public list of arts organizations, artists, critics and galleries, then seek contributions from your colleagues and audience through Listly to broaden and refine the list. Over time, this list might emerge as a really useful public service source of information about the arts in your city.

All lists hosted by Listly can be searched through the site’s search bar, and you can also embed the list into a blog or website.

How do you generate a Twitter list in Listly?

To get started, Listly needs to “sync” with a list you’ve already created in Twitter.

When you open a Listly account, it will ask you to connect your Twitter account (and other social media networks if you want to).

Once you’re logged in, a pink NEW LIST button will appear at the top of the dashboard.

After clicking NEW LIST, a pop-up box appears with the options to name your list, provide a description and tags and importantly, sync with your selected Twitter list.

You can also add a headline image which Listly crops to 600 x 250 pixels.

At the moment there seems to be no specific list on media development on Listly. So building on our previous post on Twitter lists, I’ve created a new list called Media Development.

Once Listly has synced with your Twitter list and generated your new list, it should look like the example above.

Your Listly list can be viewed in different ways: ranked by the crowd, curated or from newest to oldest entries.

Contributors, or “Helpers” as Listly calls them, can log in with their Twitter account and then directly interact with the list to add, rank and curate important sources on Twitter. New additions are added to queue.

You can also share your list with a unique URL or embed into website or blog that accepts Javascript. Listly offers a plug-in for WordPress.

For more information on Listly features, check out this beginners guide.

What else should journalists know about using Twitter lists with Listly?

There are a couple of things to bear in mind about integrating Twitter lists with Listly. At present, it seems that Twitter and Listly are not syncing or updating lists in both directions: only from Listly to Twitter. Hence, if you add more people to your original list in Twitter, it won’t show in Listly. The idea is to curate the list from Listly.

This might be a little problematic depending on how you use Twitter and Twitter lists. For example, I use either Tweetdeck or Tweetbot and have a couple of Twitter lists open in separate columns. My first instinct would be to update a Twitter list from the application that I have open on my desktop. One workaround might be to re-import the Twitter list into Listly.

And while Listly holds a lot of potential for curating a useful list, it’s only going to work if your audience knows about it.

Yes, you can search for lists in Listly, but along with sharing your list with your social media networks, it might be worth adding something like “Help curate this list on Listly (plusURL)” to the description of your Twitter list.

And like a lot of things in social media, you only get out of it what you put in to it.

We’re keen to see how our example with a Media Development list on Listly evolves and we of course invite you to contribute.

Cost:  A free Listly account offers unlimited lists. The premium service is US$9.99/month and offers private lists with secret URL, more moderation and layout features and no advertisements. At the moment, Free account holders can also make up to three lists that have Premium features.

Languages: English only

Mobile devices: Lists that are embedded on blogs have a responsive design and adjust to different screen sizes

Take a look at this blog post were we offer some tips on searching for Twitter lists and finding information within a list.

Author: Guy Degen

But how do you go about searching for good Twitter lists or refining your search for specific information within a Twitter list?

Here are a few quick search tips to try. (If you’re new to Twitter and want to find out how to create or subscribe to a list check out this guide.)

Look at who is following who

I find it’s always an interesting exercise to check out the public lists of people I follow on Twitter.

For example, I had been looking to make a list of people tweeting about Berlin. But first, I checked the lists curated by journalists in Berlin who I follow and found a quite good public list about Berlin. It was much easier to subscribe to this list than create a new one. This list is a quick way for me to find out about events happening in my home city, and for potential story ideas.

When you’re logged into Twitter, all you have to do is go to someone’s profile page and click on Lists to see the public lists they have subscribed to, or are a member of.

Using Google search

Public Twitter lists are also searchable through Google.

The shortcut search method is to do a single website search by typing site:website.com “keywords” into Google.

In other words, you’re asking Google to only search the website twitter.com plus specific “keywords” in quotation marks.

In the example below, I’m trying to search for public lists on twitter.com about “media development”.

This method produces some good results. You can of course use Google’s Advanced Search tool to do exactly the same and more such as search for results in a particular language.

Find specific information within a Twitter list

Creating or subscribing to public lists can help you start cutting through the “noise” of Twitter and find useful information. But lets face it, even with a good Twitter list that is regularly updated and maintained, you might need to occasionally refine your search even further. This is where a tool like Tweetdeck can help.

Tweetdeck is a free application that lets you manage your Twitter timelines and organize them into columns. So, if you’re subscribing to a list, all of the tweets from that list can be viewed in separate column.

When you click on the slider icon at the top right hand side of a column in Tweetdeck, a drop down menu appears. The default setting for Content (information in tweets) is Any.

If you wish to look for specific keywords, or exclude keywords, within tweets from this list, select Any. Another drop down menu will appear and gives you the options of matching and excluding keywords. Enter your keywords and the list will automatically adjust to only display tweets with what you’re looking for.

In the example above, I have a public list of bloggers I follow who tweet about photography and videography. They usually tweet about the latest camera and filming equipment. But if I want to only see tweets about say the new Panasonic GH4 camera, then entering “GH4” in the matching field helps me to refine my search. I have also selected to exclude any retweets, again a simple way of filtering unwanted noise.

In an upcoming blog post we’ll take closer a look at List.ly – a tool not only for creating and searching Twitter lists, but also helpful for making them more social.

Author: Guy Degen

Graphic: flickr/mmapstone

Most reporters use a whole bunch of different online tools and apps such as Skype, WhatsApp, Facebook, Gmail, Tumblr, Blogger, WordPress and Dropbox to make their work easier. To commemorate this year’s Safer Internet Day, onMedia highlights a few risks associated with some of the most popular journalism tools and suggests possible, more secure alternatives.

Skype

Functionality: Video conferences, chats with newsmakers, interviews and interview recordings.

Risks for journalists: Skype was always assumed to be safe because of its end-to-end encryption. But the Snowden revelations have revealed that the NSA has been listening to Skype since 2011 and it’s unclear to what extent other agencies are able to intercept the service. Skype “can no longer be trusted to protect user privacy,” says Eric King, head of research at Privacy International.

Possible solutions: Use Skype as if it were a public forum. Everything you say or write may be used against you.

Alternatives: Jitsi (encrypted text, voice and video messaging), Linphone (encrypted voice and video chat), Mumble (encrypted voice chat).

WhatsApp

Functionality: WhatsApp is one of the most popular messaging apps in the word. It lets you send messages without having to pay for sms services although the person you are sending to also has to be using the app. It’s an easy way to stay in touch with the newsroom and colleagues while in the field, especially as you can exchange images, video and audio.

Risks for journalists: Currently, WhatsApp claims messages are encrypted but because the company won’t say what method they use, it’s difficult to know how secure the service is. There are reports that WhatsApp messages sent over wifi and other public channels can be decrypted. There are apps out there which try to make WhatsApp more secure.

Possible solutions: Resort to more secure apps

Alternatives: Pidgin (off-the-record messaging), TorChat (anonymous P2P chat), ChatSecure (formerly Gibberbot) and Xabber for Android.

Facebook

Functionality: You don’t really need to have Facebook explained to you, right? Journalists use this global social network to share their work, crowdsource information, stay in touch with colleagues and newsmakers, follow companies and news on their beats, subscribe to important people and participate in groups.

Risks for journalists: Facebook is a huge data collector. The list of your friends may influence the decision of local authorities to grant you a visa to work in a certain region, and the open groups you are a member of let strangers know about your interests even if your profile is closed to external visitors. Also, Facebook is constantly experimenting with new tracking methods.

Possible solutions: Be very careful publishing information on Facebook. Once it’s online, you lose control of it. Go to the privacy settings in the upper right corner of your Facebook page and make sure you have all the precautionary measures taken. Always log out of your Facebook account when surfing other websites.

Alternatives: To be able to use other, private social networks, you’ll need a certain level of technical proficiency. Of course you need to remember that it’s difficult to have the same reach as Facebook when using its alternatives. Diaspora is a community-run, distributed social network that allows you to be in control of your information. Other alternatives: Buddycloud, Friendica and RetroShare.

Twitter

Functionality: Twitter is good for following breaking news and breaking news yourself. You can also use it to collaborate with others, find communities, and follow trends and topics.

Risks for journalists: Everything you do on Twitter is visible. If you have geotagging enabled, it can be easy to locate you. The service is also a haven for malware attacks.

Possible solutions: Be careful what you post and whom you follow. Don’t create open lists unless you are absolutely sure you won’t get into trouble by doing this. Disable geotagging.

Alternatives: Sorry, there isn’t really one.

Gmail / Googlemail

Functionality: This is one of the most popular email clients with integrated tasks, contacts and calendar.

Risks for journalists: Gmail has fairly robust security for everyday use but it’s not advisable if you need to keep your communications secret. Google scans your email’s content to better target you with ads and also complies with government requests for information. Kapersky has more information about the risks here.

Possible solutions: Don’t use your Gmail account to discuss sensitive issues. Add two-step verification to your account to prevent third parties from cracking it.

Alternatives: MyKolab (hosted in Switzerland), Riseup.

Google Drive

Functionality: Create, store and share documents, presentations and spreadsheets in the cloud. The service is connected to your Google account.

Risks for journalists: Your information can be made available to government agencies.

Possible solutions: Use Google Drive only for documents with no great importance. Use local physical backup (external hard drives, USB flash drives) when possible.

Alternatives: ownCloud, SparkleShare, Tahoe-LAFS.

Google search

Functionality: Google search is pretty much the gold standard and definitely the most popular option for research on the web. There are a number of techniques such as advanced search that help you achieve better results.

Risks for journalists: Google stores your searches. This information can be made information available to government agencies upon request.

Possible solutions: Try other search engines.

Alternatives: DuckDuckGo (anonymous web searches), Startpage (private, unlogged web searches), YaCy (decentralized web search), Seeks Project (open decentralized platform for collaborative search).

Dropbox

Functionality: Store text, audio and video files in the cloud. Dropbox comes in handy when you need to synchronize your data across different devices.

Risks for journalists: Your data might be available to third parties.

Possible solutions: Always encrypt your data before moving it to Dropbox. You can use Boxcryptor or free encrypting tools like TrueCrypt or AxCrypt. Read more about file encryption here.

Alternatives: The same as for Google Drive: ownCloud, SparkleShare, Tahoe-LAFS.

Tumblr/Blogger/WordPress

Functionality: Publishing platforms for text, audio and video. They help journalists blog on issues, establish a web presence and thus become more visible to their audience.

Risks for journalists: Your data might be available to third parties.

Possible solutions: Try self-hosting. This will help you stay in control of your data. For example, WordPress offers an option to self-host your data.

Alternatives: WordPress.org (self-hosted website publishing), Noblogs (blog publishing platform based on WordPress), MediaGoblin (decentralized media publishing platform), Zenphoto (self-hosted media management system).

For more free alternatives to proprietary software, check out the website PrismBreak.

By Natalia Karbasova

Watch out! Someone could be spying on you

When hackers broke into AP’s Twitter account earlier in 2013, their fake tweet about Barack Obama being injured in an explosion at the White House caused the US stock market to plunge. Just before the Twitter account was hacked, AP staffers had received an email asking them to click on a link that supposedly went to a Washington Post article.

Although it looked legitimate, the email was actually a phishing attack (view the email here). The fraudulent link redirected the recipients to a bogus site where they were asked for their login credentials. At least one person fell for the phishing email and gave the hackers, the Syrian Electronic Army, the password they needed to tweet in AP’s name.

In this case, the incident proved more embarrassing than damaging – the tweet was corrected immediately and the stock market recovered within minutes.

But falling for a phishing attack can have much more serious repercussions.

In Bahrain at least 11 people were imprisoned between October 2012 and May 2013 after the Bahraini government successfully phished their identities. All had allegedly written anonymous Tweets criticizing Bahrain’s King Hamad. The authorities identified the individuals by sending them fake links from Twitter and Facebook. When they clicked on the link, spy software noted the computer’s IP address allowing authorities to track the Twitter users down (read how the Bahriani government did this in an extensive report by Bahrainwatch.org).

Phishing attacks don’t just have to come from Twitter or email though; from sms to Skype, What’s App or even via the comments box on an online article, fake links can be embedded in any kind of communication.

What’s more, phishing doesn’t always involve a fake link. It might contain a downloadable file containing malicious software (or malware) that installs itself on your computer or smartphone without your knowledge.

Renowned security expert Jacob Appelbaum tweeted earlier this year about discovering spyware on the computer of an Angolan activist. Installed when an email attachment was opened, the spyware took shots of the victim’s screen and copied his files, automatically sending the information to remote servers.

This particular spyware wasn’t very high-tech but other malware can log keystrokes to steal logins and passwords, record visited websites or even activate the camera or microphone on the laptop to record what people are doing.

We journalist are used to receiving emails, tweets or Facebook messages with links to stories or documents. After all, being on top of the news is part of our jobs. But letting hackers, whether they are government authorities or criminals, steal our information can endanger not only our stories, but also ourselves, our colleagues and most importantly, our sources. That’s why it is essential to be aware of the problem.

Here are a few tips:

Mouse over the link. You can view a link’s URL by hovering over it with your mouse (but don’t click). If the URLs doesn’t look legitimate, or doesn’t match the one given in the email text, don’t open it.

Read the URL carefully. Fake links will often try to trick you into thinking the URL is real by using similar spelling to a real site, for example www.aljazera.com instead of the correct www.aljazeera.com. If you don’t look carefully, it’s easy to think you’re clicking on a legitimate link.

Check the domain name. The domain name is the part of the URL just before the first slash. For example, Deutsche Welle’s domain is www.dw.com. Genuine DW links have the domain name before the first slash – for example, http://akademie.dw.com/digitalsafety/ is still a genuine DW URL as the “dw.de” is before the first slash. A phishing URL to a fake DW site may look like this www.topstories.com/dw/globalization. Here’s a great spambusters post that tells lets you know more about checking links.

Use an URL checker. They aren’t foolproof but sites such as safeweb.norton.com are a good start.

Don’t open unverified attachments. All file types can contain malware. If in doubt, delete.

To find out more about avoiding hacking attacks, tune into the What’s in that message live online session with security expert Morgan Marquis-Boire on December 6 at 4pm CET. It’s just one of six online sessions happening during the “Digital Safety for Journalists” Open Online Workshop running from December 2-6. Other live sessions include mobile phone safety and using the Internet without being tracked.

Organized by DW Akademie together with Reporters Without Borders, the online workshop is free and open to anyone. For more information, visit the Digital Safety for Journalists website where you’ll also find daily posts on the topic starting from November 25.

Otherwise check out the Rory Peck Trust website which has fantastic online digital security resources written specifically for freelance journalists. For more about malware, see the entry How can I avoid malware.

Written by Kate Hairsine and edited by Kyle James