A media house needs to be continually assessing whether its output is meeting the needs of the audience and achieving business targets.

This starts in the newsroom and filters through to every area of the organisation.

News is a classic people business: one relatively small set of people passes on information to another larger set of people.

There is a lot of other stuff going on, of course: newsgathering, writing, photography, technology, distribution, business and so on. But in the end it’s one person telling stories to other people.

We know that every human being is different from every other human being and not surprisingly every news boss is different from every other news boss. They all have their own ways of doing things and there is no single formula for success. A lot depends on personality.

But there are some things that are common to every good newsroom and continuous, critical review of its own output is one of them.

In the absence of a formula for the news review process, here are some things a news boss should keep in mind.

• You have to care deeply and passionately about the output. 
  • This means reading, listening or watching everything that comes out of the newsroom and assessing whether it is up to standard.
• You have to convey your enthusiasm to your team.
  • They have to know you are closely interested in all their work. Your enthusiasm will rub off on them, with positive results.
• You set the standards for all to follow.
  • You should work out some simple messages that you keep repeating. For example:
    • The most important quality of every story coming out of this newsroom is accuracy. We don’t accept ANY errors.
    • We all have opinions but when you come to work here, you leave your personal opinions at home.
    • We keep notes on EVERYTHING. We can’t defend a story if you can’t produce your notes.
    • We always try to be fair and straight with everyone, from the subject of our stories to our readers and our colleagues.
    • We don’t just report on a community, we are part of that community and we cannot serve the community unless we understand it intimately
• You never let an error pass unnoticed.
  • This is the single most important element of quality control. If one of your team makes a mistake and nobody mentions it, it means either you didn’t see it or you don’t care. This is demotivating for staff. You must at least talk to them about it.
• Deliver your critical messages wisely.
  • The old days of quality control by means of a fierce telling-off are over. You can be stern and disapproving without bullying. You can also understand that the best journalists are their own fiercest critics. They already feel bad about their error and you don’t need to rub their noses in it. Simply noticing that you are disappointed in them will be enough of a penalty.
• Praise and criticism should be dished out judiciously.
  • We expect a consistently high level of competence so high praise should be reserved for work that is exceptional. Similarly, though, there will always be mistakes, they should be rare and criticism should be proportionate.
• Critical review needs to be systematic, not haphazard.
  • There needs to be a structure, a regular routine of looking back and assessing what has gone right and what has gone wrong. The existence of the routine is a guarantee that important messages will not get overlooked in the pressure of the daily news cycle.
• There should be short-term review meetings.
  • In day-to-day operations, my own preference was to start the morning news meeting with a brief review of what we had done the previous day, before continuing on to plan the day’s coverage. If there was something too sensitive or too important to be raised at that meeting, I would ask the relevant people to stay behind for further discussions.
• There should be long-term review meetings.
  • You need to take a step back, every now and then to look, not just at individual stories, but also at how well you are covering issues. What important themes are you missing? Do you have the right staff to produce the coverage that circumstances require? Are you publishing in the right places and on the right platforms? And so on. I remember attending a meeting in 1975 and my editor suddenly saying: “I’ve realised we did not adequately cover the revolution in Portugal last year.” He explained that if we had thought more carefully about it at the time, we would have spotted the implications of Portugal abandoning its colonies, the result of which was to embolden revolutionary movements throughout Southern Africa.
• Include the competition in your reviews.
  • You should not assess your organisation’s performance in isolation.It’s no good if you did a pretty good job but your competitors did a better one. Did they have stories you missed? Were they first with the news? Did they think more creatively about how to handle a particular story? Were their headlines better? Always tell your own staff that you will never accept being anything less than number one in your market.
• You need to identify and understand your audience.
  • A great British newspaper editor in the middle of the 20th Century told his staff they were writing for “the man on the Clapham omnibus and the woman on Rhyl promenade.” He went on to say these imaginary folk represented ordinary people who were interested in improving their lives, owning their own homes and getting on in the world. This is similar to the modern technique of audience segmentation. It helps you to know what kind of stories your audience is interested in, and where they go to get their information. You cannot have too much information about your audience.
• A news organisation that goes broke is no use to anyone.
  • The news media is frequently under financial pressure and many titles have disappeared in the past 20 years. The editorial output of the news must be consistent with a viable and sustainable business strategy. So there should be regular reviews, with the relevant business colleagues, about how the news operation can play a part, within its existing ethical and editorial standards, in ensuring the success of the business.
• Review your own performance.
  • You expect your staff to be self-critical and you should do the same. At the end of every day, ask yourself: did I do everything I could to make today’s output as good as possible? If not, did I miss any obvious chances? Did I deal with everybody fairly and professionally? Did I inject a bit of fun into proceedings, to alleviate tension and make everybody feel better?

Bob Eggington

Related articles

Creating a vibrant newsroom culture

How to run an effective news meeting

Getting the best out of a news meeting

Hey AI, what are the top stories of the day?

The post Reviewing news output is essential first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The six-week course is designed to be adapted by universities and colleges to meet local needs.

It explores modern journalism, focusing on technology, ethics, and media production. Students will examine digital newsgathering, fact-checking, and editorial ethics while analysing misinformation and bias in the news. The course also covers the role of AI and algorithms in shaping journalism. Through a mix of theory and practice, students will gain the skills to navigate and influence the future of digital media.

Week 1: Editorial ethics in the digital age

• Overview:
  • In today’s fast-changing digital media landscape, journalistic ethics face new challenges. In the first week we’ll focus on core values such as accuracy, fairness, and integrity. We’ll examine how these principles apply online, the impact of unconscious bias on news, and the pressures of the digital news cycle. Through readings and discussions, we’ll tackle ethical dilemmas and learn how to uphold high journalistic standards.
• Topics:
  • Ethical principles in digital journalism and their practical applications
  • Ensuring accuracy, fairness, and journalistic integrity in online reporting
  • The role of unconscious bias in shaping media narratives and audience trust
  • Ethical dilemmas in the fast-paced, high-pressure digital news environment
• Essential reading:
  • Why editorial ethics are important
  • Lesson: Editorial ethics
  • Integrity and journalism
  • Lesson: Integrity in journalism
  • Accuracy in journalism
  • Lesson: Accuracy in journalism

Week 2: Digital newsgathering and production

• Overview:
  • The digital revolution has transformed journalism, shifting from traditional reporting to advanced digital production. In the second week you’ll learn how newsrooms adapt to a digital-first world. We’ll explore investigative journalism in a multi-platform environment, advanced storytelling techniques for digital and video formats, and strategies for audience engagement. This week will equip you with the skills to create impactful stories in today’s fast-paced media landscape.
• Topics:
  • The transformation of traditional newsrooms into digital-first operations
  • Investigative journalism in a multi-platform and converged media environment
  • Advanced storytelling techniques for digital, video, and interactive formats
  • Effective strategies for online news prioritization and audience engagement
• Essential reading:
  • Introducing a converged newsroom strategy
  • Lesson: Newsroom convergence
  • Creating a converged news operation
  • Convergence workflows: Roles and responsibilities
  • Lesson: How to construct a TV news package
  • Presenting and exploiting content online
  • How to set online news priorities
  • Managing a news website front page

Week 3: Advanced fact-checking in the digital age

• Overview:
  • As information spreads more rapidly and misinformation is a constant threat, it’s crucial to know how to separate fact from fiction. In the third week we’ll focus on the importance of verification in journalism. You’ll learn ethical fact-checking practices and methods for real-time digital verification. We’ll also cover how to create fact-checking systems and explore how AI is used to detect manipulated content. By the end of the week, you’ll be equipped to defend against misinformation and uphold journalistic integrity.
• Topics:
  • The ethical necessity of rigorous fact-checking in modern journalism
  • Investigative methodologies for real-time digital verification
  • Developing and implementing comprehensive fact-checking frameworks
  • The role of artificial intelligence in detecting misinformation and verifying sources
• Essential reading:
  • Fact-checking and adding context
  • Beyond basic fact-checking
  • Lesson: Beyond basic fact-checking
  • Creating a strong fact-checking system

Week 4: Misinformation, disinformation, and fake news

• Overview:
  • Not only has the digital age enabled information to spread faster, it’s also also made it easier to manipulate, which can have serious social and political effects. In the fourth week we’ll explore the dangers of false information. You’ll learn how to spot and counter disinformation and understand the importance of trust in digital journalism. We’ll also look at the rise of deepfakes and AI-generated content and their impact on public trust. This week will help you navigate the challenges of misinformation in today’s media landscape.treacherous landscape of online deception and learn how to defend the truth in an age of pervasive misinformation.
• Topics:
  • The societal and political ramifications of misinformation campaigns
  • Techniques for identifying and countering disinformation tactics
  • The role of trust chains in digital journalism and credibility assessment
  • The impact of deepfakes and AI-generated content on public trust
• Essential reading:
  • How to identify and deal with fake news
  • Fake news and trust chains
  • Lesson: Fake news
  • Dealing with disinformation and misinformation
  • Information disorder: Mapping the landscape
  • Snacking on rumour, feeding on fact

Week 5: Bias, social media, and audience influence

• Overview:
  • The influence of social media where unverified information spreads at speed, along with algorithms deciding what information is shared, maintaining journalistic integrity is harder than ever. In the fifth week we’ll examine how bias affects news production and trust in media. You’ll learn about the powerful role social media plays in spreading news and shaping how it’s created. We’ll look at audience habits and how their demand for instant, personalised content can impact objective reporting. This week will provide practical strategies for reducing bias and keeping your journalism fair and truthful.
• Topics:
  • The impact of bias in digital journalism and media credibility
  • The influence of social media platforms on news production and dissemination
  • Audience consumption patterns and their implications for journalistic integrity
  • Strategies for mitigating bias and enhancing journalistic objectivity
• Essential reading:
  • • Confronting editorial bias in election coverage
    • Social media in news production and news dissemination
    • Adapting to changing audience behaviour and monitoring the market
    • Unconscious bias and its impact on journalism
    • Lesson: Unconscious bias

Week 6: Artificial intelligence and algorithmic influence in journalism

• Overview:
  • Artificial intelligence is changing journalism. It offers new possibilities and raises new factual and ethical challenges. In the sixth and final week we’ll explore how AI is used in news automation, curation, and investigative reporting. You’ll learn about the practical uses of AI and the ethical concerns, like algorithmic bias. We’ll also examine how machine learning and audience targeting are shaping the future of journalism. This week will give you strategies to maintain journalistic integrity in an AI-driven media world, ensuring truth remains the priority.
• Topics:
  • The expanding role of AI in news automation, curation, and investigative journalism
  • The ethical challenges posed by algorithmic bias and AI-driven reporting
  • The implications of machine learning and audience targeting on journalism’s future
  • Strategies for maintaining journalistic integrity in an AI-driven media landscape
• Essential reading:
  • Artificial intelligence assesses its role in journalism
  • AI and investigative journalism
  • Lesson: AI-powered investigations
  • How to detect AI-generated images
  • Systems thinking for journalists

Coursework and assessement

For coursework and assessment, students are expected to combine the theoretical and practical knowledge gained throughout the six weeks. This includes demonstrating an understanding of ethical considerations in digital journalism, proficiency in digital newsgathering and verification techniques, and the ability to critically analyse the impact of emerging technologies. Assessments will include a combination of written assignments, such as essays and case studies, and practical exercises, such as developing fact-checking frameworks or analysing digital news narratives for bias. Students should be prepared to articulate their perspectives on the future of journalism, considering the interplay of technological advancements, ethical dilemmas, and audience engagement. Ultimately, this course aims to foster informed, ethical, and adaptable journalists capable of upholding journalistic integrity in the rapidly evolving digital age.

The post Module: Digital Journalism first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The news of a bomb blast at an overseas army barracks sent shockwaves through a small town where five of the soldiers lived. One of died.

A reporter, working for the local newspaper, was sent out to knock on the door of the soldier who was killed. This is called ‘doorstepping’ in newsgathering.

The newspaper’s news editor, driven by the need for a compelling local angle, wanted a photograph of the soldier and quotes from his grieving family.

The reporter arrived at the family home to find the curtains closed. Residents in neighbouring houses had also closed their curtains in a communal show of sympathy and respect.

As the reporter knocked on the door he heard whispering inside. He knocked again, the whispering stopped. All was still. It was clear the family was inside, but it was also clear that family members didn’t want to answer the door.

The reporter called the news editor to explain the situation. The response was firm: “Keep trying, we need a photograph and a quote”.

The reporter was told to “stay there until you get something”. Although he understood the news value of persisting he also felt uncomfortable intruding on a family in mourning.

Driven by the news editor’s instructions the reporter went back to the house. As he arrived a woman at the house next door stopped him and pleaded that he leave the family alone “they’ve suffered enough”, he was told.

The reporter was caught in a painful ethical bind:

• The pressure to perform: He didn’t want to let his news editor down and was afraid that if he didn’t get a photo and a quote another reporter would and he would be seen to have failed at his job.
• The moral imperative: He recognised the profound grief of the family and the inherent violation of their privacy and didn’t want to intrude.
• Afraid of confrontation: He didn’t want an unpleasant confrontation with family members.

Faced with this conflict, the reporter made a compromise. He called the news editor, falsely claiming that the family had left and that he had just missed them. The news editor then instructed the reporter to interview neighbours, which he did, obtaining valuable information and a photograph. He also scribbled a note of condolence with his name and phone number on then posted it through the door. While this resulted in a story for the newspaper and left the grieving family undisturbed, the reporter had resorted to dishonesty.

Did the reporter do the right thing? And, if not, what should he have done?

Suggested right action:

The ethically sound course of action would have been for the reporter to:

1. Communicate honestly: He should have told the news editor about the  neighbour’s plea and shared his own ethical concerns about intruding on the grieving family.
2. Alternative action: He should have explained that he had left a handwritten note with his contact details inviting the family to get in touch if they felt able to talk to him.
3. Advocate for sensitivity: He could have suggested other alternatives such as publishing a respectful tribute to the soldier based on information from friends and community members, rather than pushing for a direct, intrusive interview with the bereaved family.
4. Stand firm on ethical principles: If the news editor insisted on intrusive tactics, the reporter should have respectfully but firmly reiterated his ethical objections, even if it meant risking his job.
5. Seek alternative angles: The reporter could have explored the wider impact on the community, or the life of the soldier through his friends and colleagues.

Summary:

The reporter’s decision to lie, while it achieved the immediate goal of protecting the grieving family, compromised his integrity. It also set a dangerous precedent, suggesting that dishonesty is acceptable when faced with ethical dilemmas.

What should have happened is that the news editor should have taken into account the reporter’s concerns, and the paper should have shown respect for the grieving family. A story that focused on the life of the soldier, and the impact on the community would have been a better way to report the story.

Journalism has a responsibility to report the truth, but it also has a responsibility to act with compassion and respect. In the pursuit of a story, ethical principles should never be sacrificed.

When analysing a “doorstepping” scenario, it’s crucial to understand that it’s a practice laden with ethical and practical complexities. It’s not simply about gathering information; it’s about the power dynamics inherent in approaching someone at their private residence. This act inherently disrupts an individual’s sense of security and control, and therefore requires a high level of consideration.

• Ethical considerations:
  • The balance between the public’s right to know and an individual’s right to privacy is paramount. Doorstepping can easily cross the line into harassment, especially when dealing with vulnerable individuals or sensitive topics.
  • The potential for misrepresentation or manipulation is significant. The way questions are phrased, the tone of the interaction, and the editing of any resulting footage can all influence public perception in ways that may be unfair or inaccurate.
  • The psychological impact on the person being doorstepped must be considered. Unexpected confrontation at one’s home can cause significant distress, regardless of the individual’s perceived culpability.
• Practical implications:
  • The effectiveness of doorstepping as an information-gathering technique is debatable. While it can yield dramatic footage or sound bites, it often results in defensive or evasive responses.
  • The legal implications of doorstepping vary depending on jurisdiction and the specific circumstances. Issues such as trespass, harassment, and defamation can arise.
  • The rise of social media and rapid information sharing has changed how these interactions are perceived. Now, any interaction can be recorded by the doorstepped person and distributed to a large audience. This adds another layer of complexity to the action.
• Contextual nuances:
  • The legitimacy of doorstepping often depends on the context. Is it being used to hold powerful figures accountable, or to sensationalise a private matter?
  • The behaviour of the individual conducting the doorstepping is critical. Respectful and professional conduct can mitigate some of the ethical concerns, while aggressive or intrusive behaviour exacerbates them.
  • The public perception of the person being doorstepped plays a large role in how the action is viewed. A person viewed as already being in the wrong, will receive less public sympathy than a person viewed as an innocent party.

In essence, analysing a doorstepping scenario requires a nuanced understanding of the ethical, practical, and contextual factors at play. It’s a practice that should be approached with extreme caution and a deep respect for individual rights.

In the real-life case on which this scenario is based the family responded to the reporter’s handwritten note, invited him to visit, and shared photographs and memories of the deceased, which resulted in an exclusive feature for the local newspaper.

The post Doorstepping – scenario first appeared on Media Helping Media.

It’s based on an article ‘Why editorial ethics are important‘ which we suggest trainers read before adapting the lesson plan for your own purposes.

Learning objective

Students will evaluate editorial decisions by applying ethical guidelines to various journalistic scenarios. They will identify potential ethical challenges and propose solutions to ensure integrity and fairness in reporting.

• Student-facing objective: By the end of this lesson the student will be able to assess editorial choices using ethical standards and suggest ways to handle ethical dilemmas in journalism.
• Standards: Students will learn how to navigate some of the ethical challenges they might face as they go about their work.

Learning activities

Warm-up

Begin with a brief discussion on the concept of bias in newsgathering and media production. Ask students to think about a news story they’ve recently encountered. Prompt them with questions:

• What was the main message of the story?
• Did the story seem to favour a particular viewpoint?
• Were multiple perspectives presented?

Encourage students to share their thoughts with a partner. After a few minutes, ask volunteers to share insights with the class. This will activate prior knowledge and set the stage for exploring editorial ethics.

Direct instruction

1. Conceptual understanding: Introduce the core principles of editorial ethics. Discuss key concepts such as accuracy, impartiality, and integrity. Use real-world examples to illustrate these principles. For instance, present a case where a journalist faced an ethical dilemma, such as whether to publish sensitive information. Ask students to identify the ethical considerations involved.
2. Procedural skills and fluency: Explain the process of evaluating a news story for ethical compliance. Break down the steps:
   • Identify the journalistic purpose.
   • Assess the inclusion of diverse perspectives.
   • Evaluate the thoroughness and fairness of the reporting.
3. Asking critical questions: Provide a sample news article (without revealing its source) and guide students through these steps, prompting them to ask critical questions about the article’s content and approach.
4. Application: Present a hypothetical scenario where students must make editorial decisions. For example, a story about a local protest with conflicting reports from different sources. Ask students to:
   • Determine which sources to trust and why.
   • Decide how to present the story to ensure fairness and accuracy.
   • Consider the potential consequences of their editorial choices.
5. Group discussion: Facilitate a class discussion on the decisions made and the ethical implications, encouraging students to justify their choices based on the principles discussed.

Guided practice

Think, Pair, Share: Guide students through a structured discussion to apply ethical guidelines to a real-world scenario.

• Think: Present a brief news article with potential ethical issues. Ask students to individually identify and note any ethical challenges they observe, considering questions like: What is the journalistic purpose? Are diverse perspectives included? Is the reporting thorough and fair?
• Pair: Have students pair up to discuss their observations. Encourage them to compare notes and refine their understanding of the ethical issues present in the article.
• Share: Facilitate a class-wide discussion where pairs share their findings. Encourage students to articulate their reasoning and propose solutions to the ethical challenges identified.
• Connect: As a class, connect the discussion back to the core principles of editorial ethics. Highlight how the students’ observations align with or challenge these principles.
• Reflect: Conclude with a reflection on how applying ethical guidelines can impact journalistic integrity and public trust. Encourage students to consider how they might handle similar ethical dilemmas in their future work.

Independent practice

• Provide students with a set of brief news scenarios, each containing potential ethical dilemmas.
• Ask students to individually analyse each scenario, applying the ethical guidelines discussed in class.
• Instruct them to identify the ethical challenges, propose solutions, and justify their decisions based on the principles of editorial ethics.
• Encourage students to document their thought process and conclusions for each scenario.
• Circulate to observe and support students as needed, ensuring they are engaging critically with the material.

Assignment

Ask students these questions:

1. What is one ethical guideline you applied today, and how did it influence your decision-making?
2. Can you identify a potential consequence of not following editorial ethics in journalism?
3. What’s one question you still have from today’s lesson?

Suggested answers:

1. Suggested answer to Question 1: I applied the guideline of ensuring diverse perspectives, which helped me present a balanced view in the scenario.
2. Suggested answer to Question 2: Not following editorial ethics can lead to biased reporting, which may mislead the public and damage trust in journalism.

Teacher resources

Differentiation guide

• Advanced learners: Encourage deeper analysis by having them explore complex ethical dilemmas in journalism, such as conflicts of interest or the balance between public interest and privacy. Suggest they research real-world cases where editorial ethics were challenged and present their findings to the class.
• Striving learners: Simplify scenarios and focus on one or two key ethical principles at a time. Provide structured guidance and examples to help them identify ethical challenges. Use visual aids or graphic organisers to help them map out their thought process and ethical considerations.
• Recommended reading: This lesson plan is based on an article ‘Why editorial ethics are important‘ which we suggest you read before adapting the lesson for your own purposes.

Notable definitions

• Editorial ethics: A set of principles guiding journalists to ensure their work is fair, accurate, and impartial, avoiding bias and maintaining integrity in reporting.
• Impartiality: The practice of reporting news without favoritism or bias, ensuring all relevant perspectives are considered and presented fairly.
• Integrity: Upholding honesty and moral principles in journalism, ensuring that reporting is truthful, transparent, and free from conflicts of interest.

Required materials

• Sample news articles with potential ethical issues
• Printed copies of ethical guidelines for reference
• Whiteboard and markers for class discussions
• Projector for displaying case studies and scenarios
• Notebooks or digital devices for student reflections and notes

Lesson summary

• Warm-up
• Direct instruction
• Guided practice
• Independent practice
• Assignment

The free teaching tools at the Khan Academy were used in the production of this lesson plan.

The post Lesson: Editorial Ethics first appeared on Media Helping Media.

This module provides an in-depth exploration of editorial ethics in journalism, designed for students pursuing careers in media.

It covers core principles such as accuracy, fairness, integrity, impartiality, and respect for privacy, while addressing contemporary challenges like unconscious bias and the ethical considerations of causing offence.

By integrating practical exercises, case studies, and interactive discussions, this module aims to equip students with the critical thinking skills necessary to navigate the complex ethical landscape of modern journalism.

The module, which can be adapted for local requirements, incorporates practical exercises and real-world examples to equip students with the foundational knowledge needed for a career in journalism.

It is released under the terms of the Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 licence so that educational institutions can make use of the material free-of-charge.

Target Audience: Journalism students (undergraduate and postgraduate)

Course outline

Learning objectives:

• Understand and apply core principles of journalistic ethics.
• Recognise and mitigate the impact of unconscious bias in reporting.
• Evaluate and resolve ethical dilemmas in various journalistic contexts.
• Develop strategies for ensuring accuracy, fairness, and integrity in media content.
• Comprehend the legal and ethical implications of privacy and offence in journalism.
• Improve critical thinking and decision-making skills in ethical situations.

Module content:

• Week 1: Introduction to editorial ethics and its importance
  • What are editorial ethics?
  • Why are they crucial in modern journalism?
  • The role of ethics in maintaining public trust.
  • Introduction to key ethical frameworks.
  • Resource: Why editorial ethics are important
• Week 2: Accuracy and integrity
  • The importance of fact-checking and verification.
  • Maintaining integrity in reporting.
  • Avoiding plagiarism and fabrication.
  • Resource: Accuracy in journalism
  • Resource: Integrity and journalism
  • Resource: Lesson: Accuracy in journalism
  • Resource: Lesson: Integrity in journalism
• Week 3: Fairness and impartiality
  • Presenting unbiased perspectives.
  • Giving all parties a fair hearing.
  • Distinguishing between opinion and factual reporting.
  • Resource: Fairness in journalism
  • Resource: Lesson: Fairness in journalism
  • Resource: Lesson: Impartiality in journalism
• Week 4: Respecting privacy
  • Balancing the public’s right to know with individual privacy.
  • Ethical considerations in reporting on sensitive topics.
  • Legal implications of privacy violations.
  • Resource: Respecting privacy as a journalist
  • Resource: Lesson: Respecting privacy as a journalist
• Week 5: Offence and journalism
  • The ethical considerations of causing offence.
  • Balancing freedom of expression with social responsibility.
  • Contextualising potentially offensive content.
  • Resource: Offence and journalism
  • Resource: Lesson: Offence and journalism
• Week 6: Unconscious bias
  • Identifying and understanding unconscious bias.
  • Strategies for mitigating bias in reporting.
  • Promoting inclusive and representative journalism.
  • Resource: Unconscious bias and its impact on journalism
  • Resource: Lesson: Unconscious bias and its impact on journalism
• Week 7: Ethical decision-making and case studies
  • Applying ethical frameworks to real-world scenarios.
  • Analysing complex ethical dilemmas.
  • Group discussions and debates on ethical issues.
  • Resource: Is your journalism ethical?
• Week 8: Review and assessment
  • Review of key ethical principles.
  • Assessment (e.g., essay, presentation, or ethical scenario analysis).
  • Discussion of ongoing ethical challenges in journalism.

Suggested timetable:

• Weekly schedule (3-hour sessions):
  • 1 hour: Lecture/presentation (introducing concepts and theories).
  • 1 hour: Interactive discussion/case study analysis (applying concepts to real-world examples).
  • 1 hour: Practical exercise/group activity (developing skills and critical thinking).
• Example weekly breakdown:
  • Week 1:
    • Lecture: Introduction to editorial ethics.
    • Discussion: The importance of ethics in current media.
    • Activity: Analysing ethical codes from different news organisations.
  • Week 4:
    • Lecture: Privacy and journalism.
    • Discussion: Case studies on privacy violations.
    • Activity: Writing a report while considering privacy.
  • Week 6:
    • Lecture: Unconscious bias and journalism.
    • Discussion: Identifying bias in news reports.
    • Activity: Rewriting biased articles to be more inclusive.

Assessment:

• Class participation and engagement (20%)
• Case study analysis and presentations (30%)
• Final essay or ethical scenario analysis (50%)

Teaching Methods:

• Lectures and presentations.
• Interactive discussions and debates.
• Case study analysis.
• Group activities and practical exercises.
• Guest speakers (e.g., experienced journalists, media lawyers).
• Online quizzes.

Resources:

• All links provided above.
• Additional readings on media ethics and journalism.
• Ethical codes from professional journalism organisations.

Summary:

• This journalism training module focuses on equipping students with a strong foundation in editorial ethics, essential for responsible and trustworthy reporting.
• It delves into core principles like accuracy, fairness, and integrity, emphasising their critical role in maintaining public trust.
• Students will learn to navigate ethical dilemmas, understand the importance of respecting privacy, and recognise the impact of unconscious bias in their work.
• Through case studies, discussions, and practical exercises, they will develop the skills to make sound ethical decisions in various journalistic contexts.
• The course also addresses contemporary challenges, such as the ethical considerations of causing offence and the evolving landscape of digital media.
• It aims to foster critical thinking and promote a deep understanding of the journalist’s responsibility to the public.
• By exploring real-world scenarios and engaging with ethical frameworks, students will be prepared to uphold the highest standards of journalism, ensuring their reporting is accurate, unbiased, and respectful.

The post Module: Editorial Ethics first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Learning objective

Students will identify the main elements that make a story newsworthy and evaluate its originality and impact. They will also analyse ethical considerations and develop a follow-up plan for a news story.

• Student-facing objective: By the end of this lesson the student will be able to spot what makes a story newsworthy, check if it’s original, think about its impact, and plan what to do next.
• Standards: A student will be able to spot a news story and research the elements thoroughly before publishing.

Learning activities

Warm-up

Display a series of headlines, mixing real news stories with fictional ones. Ask students to decide if each headline is a real news story or not. Encourage them to consider elements such as impact, timeliness, and unusualness. After each headline, prompt students to share their reasoning. This primes them to think critically about what makes a story newsworthy.

Direct instruction

Introduce newsworthiness: Present the core elements that make a story newsworthy: impact, timeliness, prominence, proximity, unusualness, and conflict. Use real examples to illustrate each element. For instance, discuss a recent impactful story and highlight its newsworthiness based on these criteria.

• Story originality: Explain how journalists determine if a story is fresh and original. Discuss methods such as consulting colleagues and consuming diverse news sources. Provide a scenario where students evaluate a story’s originality by comparing it with existing news coverage.
• Ethical considerations and follow-up plans: Outline the importance of ethics in journalism, focusing on accuracy, fairness, and transparency. Use a case study to explore ethical dilemmas. Then, emphasise the need for a follow-up plan by discussing how ongoing stories evolve and the journalist’s role in updating the audience.

Guided practice

Think, Pair, Share: Guide students through a collaborative exercise to apply newsworthiness criteria.

• Think: Present a brief news story. Ask students to individually identify elements that make it newsworthy, focusing on impact, timeliness, and unusualness.
• Pair: Have students pair up to discuss their findings. Encourage them to compare their assessments and refine their understanding of newsworthiness.
• Share: Facilitate a class discussion where pairs share insights. Highlight diverse perspectives.
• Originality: Provide a second story. In pairs, students determine its originality by comparing it to the first story and discussing potential ethical considerations.
• Follow-up: Ask pairs to outline a follow-up plan for one story, considering how it might evolve and the journalist’s role in maintaining audience engagement.

Independent practice

• Newsworthiness: Provide students with a set of news stories. Instruct them to individually analyse each story for newsworthiness using the criteria discussed: impact, timeliness, prominence, proximity, unusualness, and conflict.
• Originality: Assign students to research if the stories are fresh and original. They should use online resources to verify if similar stories have been published recently.
• Ethical considerations: Ask students to identify potential ethical issues in the stories. They should consider accuracy, fairness, and transparency.
• Follow-up plan: Have students draft a follow-up plan for one story, detailing how they would continue to report on it as it develops.

Circulate to observe and support students as needed.

Assignment

Ask students to answer these questions:

1. What is one key element that makes a story newsworthy?
2. How can you determine if a story is original?
3. What’s one question you still have from today’s lesson?

Here are some suggested answers:

• Suggested answer to Question 1: Impact is a key element that makes a story newsworthy.
• Suggested answer to Question 2: You can determine if a story is original by checking if similar stories have been published recently.

Teacher resources

Differentiation guide

Advanced learners: Encourage deeper analysis by having students explore the relationship between a story’s complexity and its potential quality. Challenge them to identify stories with high complexity and discuss their potential impact. Assign a task to create a detailed follow-up plan for a complex story, considering various audience engagement strategies.

Striving learners: Simplify tasks by focusing on one or two core elements of newsworthiness, such as impact and timeliness. Provide structured templates to guide their analysis of news stories. Pair them with peers for collaborative work to enhance understanding and confidence. Use visual aids to illustrate ethical considerations and follow-up plans.

Notable definitions

• Newsworthiness: The quality of a story that makes it interesting and significant enough to be reported in the news. The main elements include impact, timeliness, prominence, proximity, unusualness, and conflict.
• Originality: The uniqueness of a story, indicating that it presents new information or a fresh perspective not previously covered by other news outlets.
• Ethical considerations: The principles guiding journalists to ensure accuracy, fairness, objectivity, and transparency in their reporting.

Required materials

• Headlines: A mix of real and fictional headlines for the warm-up activity.
• Case study: A prepared case study for discussing ethical considerations.
• News stories: A set of news stories for independent practice.
• Internet access: For students to research story originality.
• Paper and pens: For students to draft follow-up plans and take notes.
• Projector/screen: To display headlines and examples during direct instruction.

Lesson summary

• Warm-up
• Direct instruction
• Guided practice
• Independent practice
• Assignment

The free teaching tools at the Khan Academy were used as a basis for converting the original article into a lesson plan.

Related article

How to spot a news story

The post Lesson: Identifying news first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Learning objective

Students will evaluate how news content can cause offence and ensure it has a clear editorial purpose. They will analyse the balance between media freedom and sensitivity to audience reactions.

• Student-facing objective: By the end of this lesson the student will be able to assess how news stories might offend people and explain why it’s important for journalists to have a clear reason for sharing such stories.
• Standards: Students will learn about how some news content could cause offence and ensure that it has a clear editorial purpose.

Learning activities

Warm-up

Begin with a brief discussion prompt: “Think of a time when you read or heard a news story that was controversial or offensive. What made it controversial or offensive?” Allow students a few minutes to reflect and jot down their thoughts. Then, ask them to share with a partner. Afterward, invite a few students to share their examples with the class. This will activate prior knowledge about media content and set the stage for analysing the balance between media freedom and audience sensitivity.

Direct instruction

• Conceptual understanding: Introduce the concept of editorial purpose. Explain that journalists must have a clear reason for including potentially offensive content. Use real-world examples, such as a news report on a violent protest, to illustrate how editorial purpose justifies the inclusion of graphic content. Discuss the importance of context and intent in journalism.
• Procedural skills and fluency: Present a case study of a controversial news story. Break down the editorial decisions made, focusing on how the journalists balanced offence with the need to inform. Guide students through identifying the editorial purpose and the potential for offence. Use a step-by-step analysis to demonstrate how journalists decide what content to include.
• Application: Assign a hypothetical scenario where students act as editors for a news outlet. Provide a brief description of a sensitive topic, such as a political scandal involving offensive language. Ask students to determine the editorial purpose and decide what content to include or exclude. Have them justify their decisions, considering both media freedom and audience sensitivity.

Guided practice

Think, Pair, Share: Guide students through a structured discussion to deepen understanding of editorial purpose and offence in journalism.

• Think: Pose the question, “How can journalists balance the need to inform with the potential to offend?”
• Pair: Have students pair up to discuss their thoughts. Encourage them to consider different perspectives and refine their ideas.
• Share: Invite pairs to share their insights with the class. Facilitate a discussion that highlights diverse viewpoints and reinforces the importance of editorial purpose.
• Connect: As students share, connect their ideas to the real-world examples discussed earlier. Emphasise how editorial decisions impact audience perception.
• Reflect: Conclude with a brief reflection. Ask students to write a sentence summarising their understanding of balancing offence and editorial purpose.

Independent practice

• Assign students to analyse a recent news article that contains potentially offensive content. Provide a list of articles to choose from.
• Instruct students to identify the editorial purpose of the article and evaluate how the journalists balanced offence with the need to inform.
• Ask students to write a brief analysis, focusing on:
  • The editorial purpose of the article.
  • The potential for offence and how it was addressed.
  • Their opinion on whether the balance was effectively achieved.

Circulate to observe and support students as needed.

Assignment

Ask students to answer these questions :

1. What is one reason journalists might include potentially offensive content in a news story?
2. How can journalists ensure that offensive content serves a clear editorial purpose?
3. What’s one question you still have from today’s lesson?

Here are some suggested answers:

• Suggested answer to Question 1: To provide a complete and accurate portrayal of events, ensuring the audience is fully informed.
• Suggested answer to Question 2: By clearly explaining the context and intent behind the content, and providing warnings if necessary.

Teacher resources

Differentiation guide

• Advanced learners: Encourage deeper analysis by having them explore the ethical implications of editorial decisions. Ask them to research a controversial news story and present a case study on how different media outlets handled the offence. Challenge them to propose alternative approaches that balance media freedom and audience sensitivity.
• Striving learners: Simplify the case study analysis by providing a guided worksheet with specific questions to answer. Pair them with peers for collaborative analysis. Offer additional examples of editorial purpose to reinforce understanding. Use visual aids to illustrate key concepts and facilitate comprehension.
• Background reading: This lesson plan is based on the article ‘Offence and journalism‘ which is published on Media Helping Media. We recommend reading the piece before adapting this lesson plan for your own purposes.

Notable definitions

• Editorial purpose: The clear and justified reason for including specific content in a news story, ensuring it serves the audience’s need for information while considering potential offence.
• Media freedom: The right of journalists to report news without censorship or restraint, balanced against the responsibility to avoid unnecessary offence.
• Offensive content: Material in news stories that may upset or disturb audiences, requiring careful consideration and justification for its inclusion.

Required materials

• Computers: For accessing news articles and conducting research.
• Projector: To display real-world examples and case studies.
• Printed articles: A selection of recent news articles with potentially offensive content.
• Worksheets: For guided analysis and reflection activities.
• Writing materials: Pens and paper for note-taking and reflections.

Lesson summary

• Warm-up
• Direct instruction
• Guided practice
• Independent practice
• Assignment

The free teaching tools at the Khan Academy were used as a basis for converting the original article into a lesson plan.

Related article

Offence and journalism

The post Lesson: Offence and Journalism first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Journalists need to be trained in how to recognise and deal with algorithmic bias in order to counter the speed and scale at which biased content spreads.

That’s the view of Gemini, the artificial intelligence (AI) conversation tool, which says that the need for such training is “more urgent than ever”.

According to AI:

“the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence and machine learning has led to a significant increase in the use of algorithms in news production…

… algorithms can introduce bias into news content, which can have serious consequences for both individuals and society.”

Media Helping Media (MHM) asked Gemini how journalists can recognise and deal with algorithmic bias.

We also asked it to design a one-day training course to equip journalists with the tools they need to tackle the issue.

The following is the text of that conversation, which took place in September 2024. During the conversation Gemini states that while the challenge of bias in news production is not entirely new, the rise of AI has made it more urgent and complex.

AI warns that:

“journalists and news organisations must adapt to this new reality by developing strategies to mitigate algorithm bias and ensure that the news they produce is fair, accurate, and representative”.

We then asked AI the following questions. The answers were immediate. Gemini’s responses are unedited other than to change them from American English to English English  (MHM’s preferred house style).

MHM: What is algorithmic bias in news production?

Gemini AI: Algorithmic bias in news production refers to the unintentional or intentional bias introduced into news content by the algorithms used to curate, personalise, or generate news. This bias can manifest in various ways, including:

• Selection bias: Algorithms may prioritise certain stories or topics over others, leading to a skewed representation of the news.
• Confirmation bias: Algorithms may reinforce existing beliefs or biases by recommending content that aligns with a user’s preferences.
• Representation bias: Algorithms may underrepresent certain groups or perspectives, leading to a lack of diversity in the news.
• Amplification bias: Algorithms may amplify certain narratives or misinformation, contributing to the spread of false or misleading information.

Factors contributing to algorithmic bias:

• Biased data: If the data used to train algorithms is biased, the algorithms will likely produce biased outputs.
• Biased algorithms: The design of algorithms themselves can introduce bias, such as by prioritising certain features or metrics over others.
• Lack of transparency: The lack of transparency in how algorithms work can make it difficult to identify and address bias.

Addressing algorithmic bias in news production requires a multi-faceted approach, including:

• Improving data quality: Ensuring that the data used to train algorithms is diverse, representative, and free from bias.
• Designing unbiased algorithms: Developing algorithms that are transparent, accountable, and resistant to bias.
• Promoting transparency: Increasing transparency in how algorithms are used and the decisions they make.
• Human oversight: Ensuring that human editors and journalists play a role in reviewing and curating news content.

By understanding and addressing algorithmic bias, news organisations can help to ensure that the news they produce is fair, accurate, and representative.

MHM: How can journalists avoid algorithmic bias if they are not in control of the algorithms?

Gemini AI: While journalists may not have direct control over the algorithms used in news production, they can take several steps to mitigate algorithmic bias:

1. Be aware of algorithmic bias: Journalists should understand the concept of algorithmic bias and how it can manifest in news content. This knowledge can help them identify potential biases and take steps to address them.
2. Critically evaluate news sources: Journalists should be sceptical of news stories generated or curated by algorithms. They should carefully evaluate the sources of information and verify the accuracy of the content.
3. Seek diverse sources: Journalists should strive to gather information from a variety of sources, including those that may not be prominently featured in algorithm-driven news feeds. This can help to ensure that the news they report is balanced and representative.
4. Use human judgement: Journalists should rely on their own judgement to assess the quality and relevance of news stories. They should be willing to override algorithmic recommendations if they believe that they are biased or misleading.
5. Advocate for transparency: Journalists can advocate for greater transparency in how algorithms are used in news production. This can help to identify and address biases and ensure that the news is produced in a fair and ethical manner.
6. Collaborate with data scientists: Journalists can collaborate with data scientists to understand how algorithms work and identify potential biases. This can help them to develop strategies for mitigating algorithm bias.

By taking these steps, journalists can help to ensure that the news they report is accurate, balanced, and free from algorithmic bias.

MHM: So mitigating algorithmic bias is a new task brought about by the advance of AI but should now become a crucial part of a news producer’s job?

Gemini AI: That’s a great observation. While the term ‘algorithmic bias’ may be relatively new, the underlying issue of bias in news production has existed for centuries. However, the advent of AI and machine learning has amplified the potential for bias to be introduced into news content at a larger scale and at a faster pace.

Here’s a breakdown of how traditional news production compared to AI-driven news:

Traditional news production:

• Human curation: News editors and journalists manually select and curate stories based on their judgement and expertise.
• Limited reach: News distribution was primarily through print and broadcast media, limiting the audience and potential for bias.

AI-driven news production:

• Algorithmic curation: Algorithms use data to recommend news stories to users, often based on their past behaviour and preferences.
• Vast reach: News can be disseminated instantly to a global audience through digital platforms, increasing the potential impact of bias.

Key differences:

• Scale: AI can process and analyse vast amounts of data, increasing the potential for bias to be introduced at a larger scale.
• Speed: AI can disseminate news at a much faster pace than traditional methods, making it difficult to identify and correct biases before they have a significant impact.
• Personalisation: AI can personalise news content to individual users, potentially reinforcing existing biases and limiting exposure to diverse perspectives.

Therefore, while the challenge of bias in news production is not entirely new, the rise of AI has made it more urgent and complex. Journalists and news organisations must adapt to this new reality by developing strategies to mitigate algorithmic bias and ensure that the news they produce is fair, accurate, and representative.

MHM: So would you say that dealing with algorithmic bias should now be part of every journalist’s basic training?

Gemini AI: Absolutely. Dealing with algorithmic bias should be a fundamental part of every journalist’s training in the digital age. Here’s why:

1. Understanding the problem: Journalists need to understand how algorithms work, how they can introduce bias, and the potential consequences of this bias.
2. Identifying and mitigating bias: Journalists should be able to identify signs of algorithmic bias in news content and take steps to mitigate its effects.
3. Evaluating sources: Journalists should be able to critically evaluate the sources of information they rely on, especially those that are generated or curated by algorithms.
4. Promoting diversity and inclusion: Journalists should strive to promote diversity and inclusion in the news they report, by seeking out a variety of sources and avoiding algorithmic biases that may underrepresent certain groups or perspectives.
5. Advocating for transparency: Journalists can advocate for greater transparency in how algorithms are used in news production, which can help to identify and address biases.

By incorporating training on algorithmic bias into journalism programmes, we can equip journalists with the skills and knowledge they need to produce fair, accurate, and representative news in the digital age.

MHM: Would you say that the need for journalists to be trained in dealing with algorithmic bias is urgent?

Gemini AI: Absolutely. The need for journalists to be trained in dealing with algorithmic bias is more urgent than ever. The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence and machine learning has led to a significant increase in the use of algorithms in news production. These algorithms can introduce bias into news content, which can have serious consequences for both individuals and society.

Here are some reasons why this training is urgent:

• Increasing reliance on algorithms: News organisations are increasingly relying on algorithms to curate, personalise, and generate news content. This means that the potential for algorithmic bias to impact news coverage is growing.
• The potential for harm: Algorithmic bias can lead to the spread of misinformation, the amplification of harmful stereotypes, and the underrepresentation of certain groups or perspectives. This can have serious consequences for individuals and society.
• The need for accountability: Journalists have a responsibility to ensure that the news they report is accurate, fair, and unbiased. This includes understanding and addressing the potential for algorithmic bias.

By training journalists in how to identify and mitigate algorithmic bias, we can help to ensure that the news we consume is reliable and trustworthy.

MHM’s conclusion

The fact that AI is warning that journalists need to be trained in recognising and dealing with algorithmic bias suggests that human judgement, journalistic ethics and editorial values are crucial in a world where artificial intelligence and machine learning is crafting so much content.

As Gemini says in the interview above, “the underlying issue of bias in news production has existed for centuries. However, the advent of AI and machine learning has amplified the potential for bias to be introduced into news content at a larger scale and at a faster pace.”

Questions

1. What is algorithmic bias in news production, and how can it manifest in news content?
2. Identify and describe two factors that contribute to algorithmic bias in news production.
3. Explain why the rise of AI has made the challenge of bias in news production more urgent and complex.
4. What are some steps journalists can take to mitigate algorithmic bias, even if they do not control the algorithms?
5. Discuss the role of human oversight in addressing algorithmic bias in news production.
6. How does algorithmic curation differ from traditional human curation in news production?
7. Why is it important for journalists to seek diverse sources when reporting news?
8. Evaluate the potential consequences of algorithmic bias on society and individuals.
9. How can journalists advocate for greater transparency in the use of algorithms in news production?
10. In what ways can collaboration between journalists and data scientists help address algorithm bias?

Answers

1. Algorithmic bias in news production refers to the unintentional or intentional bias introduced into news content by algorithms. It can manifest as selection bias, confirmation bias, representation bias, or amplification bias.
2. Two factors contributing to algorithmic bias are biased data, where the data used to train algorithms is biased, and biased algorithms, where the design of algorithms prioritises certain features or metrics over others.
3. The rise of AI has made bias in news production more urgent and complex due to the increased scale and speed at which AI can process and disseminate news, as well as the potential for personalised content to reinforce existing biases.
4. Journalists can mitigate algorithmic bias by being aware of it, critically evaluating news sources, seeking diverse sources, using human judgment, advocating for transparency, and collaborating with data scientists.
5. Human oversight involves journalists and editors reviewing and curating news content to ensure it is fair, accurate, and representative, thus helping to identify and correct algorithmic biases.
6. Algorithmic curation uses data to recommend news stories based on user behaviour and preferences, while traditional human curation relies on the judgment and expertise of news editors and journalists.
7. Seeking diverse sources is important to ensure balanced and representative news coverage, avoiding the reinforcement of biases that may underrepresent certain groups or perspectives.
8. Algorithmic bias can lead to the spread of misinformation, amplification of harmful stereotypes, and underrepresentation of certain groups, which can have serious consequences for individuals and society.
9. Journalists can advocate for transparency by pushing for clear explanations of how algorithms are used in news production and the criteria they use for decision-making.
10. Collaboration with data scientists helps journalists understand how algorithms work and identify potential biases, allowing them to develop strategies to mitigate algorithmic bias.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘Algorithmic bias’ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

The post Dealing with algorithmic bias in news first appeared on Media Helping Media.

What are the benefits and dangers of using artificial intelligence (AI) in the news production process? We interviewed Gemini, Google’s AI conversation tool, to try to find out how AI views its relationship with journalism.

Benefits listed by AI include generating routine data-driven news reports in order to free journalists to apply “critical thinking and judgement” and “empathy and understanding”, as well as highlighting important news angles that could be missed by journalists.

Dangers include “algorithmic bias” where AI perpetuates “existing biases present in the data they are trained on”, creating “deepfakes and manipulated content”, and “privacy concerns” related to data retrieval, analysis and use.

The interview with AI took place in September 2024 and is reproduced below. Gemini’s responses are unedited other than to change them from American English to English English (MHM’s preferred house style). MHM’s questions are in large bold text.

MHM: How can AI assist journalism?

Gemini AI: AI is revolutionising the way journalism is produced, offering a range of benefits that can enhance efficiency, accuracy, and accessibility. Here are some key ways AI is assisting journalism:

1. Data analysis and visualisation:

• Data-driven stories: AI can process vast amounts of data to identify trends, patterns, and anomalies that would be difficult for humans to spot. This enables journalists to create data-driven stories that are more informative and impactful.
• Interactive visualisations: AI can generate interactive visualisations, such as charts, graphs, and maps, to make complex data more understandable and engaging for readers.

2. Content creation and automation:

• Automated reporting: AI can generate routine news reports, such as sports scores, weather updates, and financial news, freeing up journalists to focus on more complex and in-depth stories.
• Content personalisation: AI can personalise news content based on individual reader preferences, ensuring that they receive the most relevant and interesting information.

3. Fact-checking and verification:

• Fake news detection: AI can help identify and debunk fake news by analysing the content, source, and context of information.
• Source verification: AI can verify the credibility of sources by checking their reputation, past accuracy, and alignment with other reputable sources.

4. Language translation and localisation:

• Global reach: AI can translate news content into multiple languages, allowing news organisations to reach a wider audience and expand their global reach.
• Cultural sensitivity: AI can help journalists understand cultural nuances and tailor their content to specific audiences.

5. Accessibility and inclusion:

• Audio and video transcription: AI can automatically transcribe audio and video content, making it accessible to people with hearing impairments.
• Text-to-speech conversion: AI can convert text into speech, allowing people with visual impairments to consume news content.

While AI offers significant benefits to journalism, it is essential to use it responsibly and ethically.

Human journalists will continue to play a crucial role in ensuring the accuracy, objectivity, and quality of news content.

MHM: What are the dangers of using AI in journalism?

Gemini AI: While AI offers significant benefits to journalism, there are also potential dangers that must be addressed:

1. Bias and discrimination:

• Algorithmic bias: AI algorithms can perpetuate existing biases present in the data they are trained on. This can lead to biased news coverage and discrimination against certain groups.
• Lack of diversity: If the teams developing AI algorithms are not diverse, they may overlook biases that are relevant to underrepresented communities.

2. Misinformation and disinformation:

• Deepfakes and manipulated content: AI can be used to create deepfakes and other manipulated content that can spread misinformation and disinformation.
• Lack of fact-checking: Over-reliance on AI for fact-checking can lead to errors and the spread of false information.

3. Job displacement:

• Automation of tasks: AI can automate routine journalistic tasks, leading to job displacement and changes in the nature of journalism work.

4. Loss of human touch:

• Lack of empathy and nuance: AI may struggle to understand complex human emotions and nuances, leading to a loss of empathy and depth in news coverage.

5. Privacy concerns:

• Data collection and surveillance: The use of AI in journalism can involve the collection and analysis of large amounts of data, raising privacy concerns.

To mitigate these risks, it is essential to:

• Develop ethical guidelines: Establish clear ethical guidelines for the use of AI in journalism.
• Promote diversity and inclusion: Ensure that teams developing AI algorithms are diverse and inclusive.
• Invest in fact-checking and verification: Continue to invest in human fact-checkers and verification processes.
• Educate journalists: Provide journalists with training on how to use AI effectively and ethically.

By addressing these challenges, we can harness the power of AI to enhance journalism while minimising its risks.

MHM: You mention privacy concerns, isn’t that an issue with AI?

Gemini AI: You’re absolutely right. The use of AI to track user data, especially in the context of social media monitoring, can raise significant privacy concerns. Here are some of the main issues:

• Mass surveillance: Large-scale tracking of online activity can lead to a form of mass surveillance, where individuals feel constantly monitored.
• Data misuse: There’s a risk that collected data could be misused for purposes other than those stated, such as targeted advertising, profiling, or even surveillance by government agencies.
• Lack of transparency: Users may not be fully aware of the extent to which their data is being collected and used, leading to a lack of control and consent.

To mitigate these risks, it’s essential for news organisations and AI developers to:

• Obtain informed consent: Clearly communicate to users how their data will be collected, used, and stored.
• Implement strong privacy measures: Implement robust security measures to protect user data from unauthorised access.
• Limit data collection: Collect only the data necessary for the intended purpose and avoid excessive tracking.
• Be transparent about AI use: Disclose the use of AI tools and how they are used to process user data.
• Comply with data protection laws: Adhere to relevant data protection laws and regulations, such as GDPR in Europe and CCPA in California.

By addressing these concerns, news organisations can leverage AI for real-time event monitoring while respecting user privacy and building trust with their audience.

MHM: What role do journalists play in a newsroom using AI?

Gemini: In a newsroom utilising AI, journalists play a crucial role as human curators, analysts, and storytellers.

While AI can automate certain tasks like data analysis and content generation, it cannot fully replace the human judgement, creativity, and ethical considerations necessary for quality journalism.

Here’s a breakdown of the key roles journalists play:

• Human curators: Journalists select and prioritise the most important stories, ensuring that AI-generated content aligns with the newsroom’s values and editorial standards.
• Analysts and verifiers: Journalists use AI tools to analyse data and identify trends, but they also verify the accuracy and reliability of this information, ensuring that it is presented fairly and accurately.
• Storytellers: Journalists craft compelling narratives that resonate with audiences, adding context, nuance, and human perspective to AI-generated content.
• Ethical guardians: Journalists are responsible for ensuring that AI is used ethically and responsibly, avoiding biases and avoiding the spread of misinformation.

In essence, while AI can augment the capabilities of journalists, it cannot replace their unique abilities to identify significant stories, evaluate information critically, and communicate effectively with audiences.

MHM: What are the unique abilities that journalists possess that AI can’t replace?

Gemini AI: While AI can assist journalists in many tasks, it cannot fully replicate the following human abilities:

• Critical thinking and judgement: Journalists possess the ability to evaluate information critically, identify biases, and make informed judgments about the significance of events.
• Empathy and understanding: Journalists can understand the human experience, connect with sources, and tell stories that resonate with audiences on an emotional level.
• Creativity and storytelling: Journalists are skilled at crafting compelling narratives, using language effectively, and engaging readers with their writing.
• Ethical decision-making: Journalists must make ethical decisions about what to report, how to report it, and who to include or exclude from their stories.
• Adaptability and flexibility: Journalists must be able to adapt to rapidly changing situations, work under pressure, and meet deadlines.
• Cultural sensitivity and understanding: Journalists need to be aware of cultural nuances and avoid perpetuating stereotypes or biases.
• Building relationships: Journalists often rely on relationships with sources to obtain information and gain insights that AI cannot access.

While AI can assist with tasks like data analysis and content generation, it cannot fully replace the human judgement, creativity, and empathy that are essential for quality journalism.

MHM: Can a newsroom function without AI?

Gemini AI: Yes, a newsroom can function without AI. However, the efficiency and effectiveness of the newsroom’s operations may be significantly impacted.

AI can streamline many tasks, such as data analysis, content generation, and distribution, making the newsroom more efficient and productive.

Without AI, journalists would need to spend more time on tasks that can be automated, such as gathering and analysing data. This could lead to a slower news cycle and potentially reduce the depth and breadth of coverage.

Additionally, AI can help identify trends and patterns in data that may be difficult for humans to spot, providing valuable insights for journalists.

While AI is a valuable tool for newsrooms, it is not essential. Human journalists will always play a crucial role in ensuring the accuracy, objectivity, and quality of news content.

MHM: Could you set out a roadmap for the introduction of AI in a newsroom?

Gemini AI: Introducing AI into a newsroom requires careful planning and implementation. Here’s a suggested roadmap:

1. Assessment and planning

• Identify needs: Determine specific areas where AI can add value, such as data analysis, content generation, or distribution.
• Assess resources: Evaluate the availability of technical expertise, data, and budget.
• Develop goals: Set clear objectives for AI implementation, including improved efficiency, accuracy, or audience engagement.

2. Data preparation

• Gather data: Collect relevant data, such as news articles, social media posts, and audience analytics.
• Clean and prepare: Ensure data quality by cleaning, standardising, and structuring it for AI processing.

3. AI tool selection

• Evaluate tools: Research and compare AI tools that align with your needs and budget. Consider factors like scalability, ease of use, and integration capabilities.
• Pilot testing: Conduct pilot tests with selected tools to assess their performance and suitability.

4. Training and education

• Train staff: Provide training to journalists, editors, and other staff on how to use AI tools effectively.
• Address concerns: Address any concerns or resistance to AI adoption.

5. Integration and implementation

• Integrate tools: Integrate AI tools into existing workflows and systems.
• Start small: Begin with small-scale projects to gain experience and build confidence.
• Monitor and adjust: Continuously monitor the performance of AI tools and make adjustments as needed.

6. Ethical considerations

• Develop guidelines: Establish ethical guidelines for AI use, including bias mitigation, transparency, and accountability.
• Human oversight: Ensure that human journalists maintain oversight and control over AI-generated content.

7. Evaluation and refinement

• Measure impact: Assess the impact of AI on newsroom efficiency, accuracy, and audience engagement.
• Refine strategies: Continuously refine AI strategies based on evaluation results.

Main considerations:

• Human-AI collaboration: Emphasise the importance of human-AI collaboration, where AI complements human expertise rather than replacing it.
• Ethical use: Prioritise ethical considerations throughout the process, ensuring AI is used responsibly and transparently.
• Continuous learning: Stay updated on AI advancements and adapt your strategies accordingly.

By following this roadmap, newsrooms can successfully introduce AI while maintaining the highest standards of journalism.

MHM: How do you assess whether the introduction of AI in a newsroom has been successful?

Gemini AI: Evaluating the success of AI implementation in a newsroom requires a multifaceted approach. Here are some key metrics and considerations:

1. Efficiency and productivity:

• Time savings: Measure the reduction in time spent on manual tasks, such as data analysis and content generation.
• Increased output: Assess whether AI has enabled the production of more content or in-depth analysis.

2. Accuracy and quality:

• Error reduction: Evaluate if AI has helped reduce errors in reporting or fact-checking.
• Content quality: Assess the quality and relevance of AI-generated content, comparing it to human-generated content.

3. Audience engagement:

• Increased reach: Measure changes in audience reach and engagement metrics, such as website traffic, social media interactions, and email subscriptions.
• Audience feedback: Gather feedback from readers to understand their perception of AI-generated content.

4. Cost-effectiveness:

• ROI: Calculate the return on investment (ROI) by comparing the costs of AI implementation to the benefits, such as increased efficiency and revenue.
• Cost savings: Identify specific areas where AI has led to cost savings, such as reduced labour costs or improved resource utilisation.

5. Ethical considerations:

• Bias mitigation: Evaluate the effectiveness of measures to mitigate bias in AI algorithms and content.
• Transparency: Assess the level of transparency regarding AI use and its limitations.

6. Staff satisfaction:

• Morale: Measure staff satisfaction with the introduction of AI and its impact on their work.
• Skill development: Assess whether AI implementation has contributed to staff skill development and professional growth.

7. Adaptability and scalability:

• Flexibility: Evaluate the ability of AI tools to adapt to changing newsroom needs and priorities.
• Scalability: Assess the scalability of AI solutions to accommodate future growth and expansion.

By considering these factors, newsrooms can gain a comprehensive understanding of the success of their AI implementation and identify areas for improvement.

MHM: Can you give an example of a journalist using AI in the news gathering and production process?

Gemini AI: A journalist is covering a major political event, such as a presidential debate. They want to stay up-to-date with the latest developments and reactions from social media. They turn to AI Tool, a social media monitoring tool that can track mentions of specific keywords or hashtags in real-time.

Process:

• Set keywords: The journalist sets up the tool to monitor keywords related to the event, such as the names of the candidates, key topics, or relevant hashtags.
• Real-time monitoring: The tool tracks social media conversations in real-time, identifying mentions of the specified keywords.
• Identify trends: The journalist can analyse the data to identify trending topics, popular opinions, and potential breaking news stories.

Benefits:

• Faster reporting: The tool allows the journalist to quickly identify and report on important developments as they happen.
• Audience insights: By analysing social media conversations, the journalist can gain insights into public opinion and tailor their reporting accordingly.
• Efficiency: The tool can save time and effort by automating the process of monitoring social media.

By using AI for real-time event monitoring, journalists can stay informed about breaking news and provide their audience with timely and relevant coverage.

MHM: Can you suggest a user case scenario?

Gemini AI: A local news journalist is struggling to keep their audience engaged with generic news articles. They want to provide more personalised content that resonates with their readers.

The journalist uses an AI-powered content personalisation platform to analyse reader data, such as demographics, interests, and past behaviour. The platform then recommends relevant news stories and topics based on individual reader profiles.

Process:

• Data collection: The journalist collects data on their audience, such as email addresses, social media interactions, and website behaviour.
• AI analysis: The AI platform analyses this data to identify patterns and preferences among different reader segments.
• Content recommendations: Based on the analysis, the platform suggests personalised news stories and topics that are likely to interest each reader.
• Delivery: The journalist can then deliver this personalised content through email newsletters, social media, or their website.

Benefits:

• Increased engagement: Personalised content is more likely to capture the attention of readers, leading to increased engagement and loyalty.
• Targeted advertising: The platform can also help the journalist target advertising to specific reader segments, improving ad revenue.
• Data-driven insights: The AI platform provides valuable insights into audience behaviour, helping the journalist understand their readers better and tailor their content accordingly.

By using AI for personalised content, the journalist can create a more engaging and relevant experience for their audience, ultimately improving their news organisation’s success.

MHM: Can you sum up AI’s involvement in journalism in three pros and cons?

Gemini AI: Here are three pros and three cons about the use of AI in journalism.

Pros of AI in Journalism:

• Increased efficiency: AI can automate routine tasks, such as data analysis and content generation, freeing up journalists to focus on more in-depth and creative work.
• Enhanced accuracy: AI can help identify errors and inconsistencies in data, improving the accuracy of reporting.
• Personalised content: AI can tailor content to individual readers based on their preferences and interests, increasing audience engagement.

Cons of AI in Journalism:

• Bias and discrimination: AI algorithms can perpetuate existing biases present in the data they are trained on, leading to biased news coverage.
• Misinformation and disinformation: AI can be used to create deepfakes and other manipulated content that can spread misinformation.
• Job displacement: The automation of routine journalistic tasks can lead to job displacement and changes in the nature of journalism work.

MHM conclusion

This interview with Gemini AI suggests that artificial intelligence has an impressive ability to generate clear and useful copy. It is also able to be self-critical. It lists the potential risks of using AI in journalism, as well as the potential benefits. Perhaps the most important message is that AI recognises there are things it can’t do – functions that require human journalistic skill. AI can’t – yet – replace journalists in creating a news service. But it can, if used carefully, be a powerful tool in making that news coverage more attractive, interesting and comprehensive.

The post Using AI as a newsroom tool first appeared on Media Helping Media.

In this scenario we look at a situation where an editor faces breaking protocol because of the strength of a story.

As one of the editors of a government radio news service in a developing democracy you receive information of an imminent threat of famine in a rural area of the country.

You are told that, unless immediate action is taken by the government and the international community, thousands of people are likely to die in the next few months.

You know that the government is aware of the situation but would rather not publicise the threatened famine in the hope that it passes unnoticed, as it has often done in the past.

In a recent visit to the famine-threatened region you saw thousands of tonnes of grain being readied for export to foreign markets by remote merchants.

Your research uncovered that these same merchants are known to have financed the mechanised farming of grain in the famine-threatened region.

The grain they harvest, you discovered, is largely intended for export to countries which are known to provide financial aid to your national government.

As you consider what to do, a written press release arrives on your desk from a commissioner of the famine-threatened region, pleading for immediate assistance.

The press release was sent to you specifically in the hope that you would broadcast the information.

You suspect that if you seek clearance from “above” to publish the information your request will either be refused, delayed, or will possibly disappear altogether.

As a result, the available grain will likely be exported and the famine will possibly take its toll.

If you allow the information to be broadcast, and point out the availability of the grain destined for export out of the region, it may shame the government into doing something, such as putting an embargo on the exportation of the grain from the region.

However, broadcasting the information could put your job at risk.

What do you do?

1. Refer the matter up to senior editors and government officials and try to persuade them that broadcasting the information is in the public interest and that, as a news outlet serving a community at risk, you have a duty of care to share what you know.
2. Broadcast the information without ‘referring up’ because you fear you will be blocked, and you consider it is more important to save lives than save your career.
3. Don’t broadcast, but instead pass the information on to a foreign correspondent or foreign media outlet which you trust in the hope that they will circulate the information.
4. Ignore the story, aware that this is probably happening in many other countries and whatever you do will make no difference.

Conclusion

How a journalist responds to such a situation will differ from country to country and culture to culture. There is no easy answer here. However, in the scenario set out above the journalist decided on option 2.

They went ahead and broadcast the information they had without ‘referring up’ because they feared they would be blocked, and they considered it to be more important to save lives than save their career.

After the information had been broadcast they received a stern telling off, but kept their job.

And as a result of the information being broadcast on the government radio channel the authorities announced an embargo on the exportation of grain until enough was available for the hungry in the region.

All the scenarios on Media Helping Media are based on actual events.

In summary

The scenario tests the boundaries of journalistic ethics in a developing democracy. An editor of a government radio news service receives information about an imminent threat of famine in a rural area. The government is aware of the situation but prefers not to publicise it. The editor discovers that thousands of tonnes of grain are being readied for export by merchants who financed mechanised farming in the famine-threatened region. A press release arrives from a commissioner of the region, pleading for immediate assistance and hoping the editor will broadcast the information. The editor suspects that seeking clearance to publish the information will result in it being blocked or delayed, leading to the famine taking its toll. Prioritising saving lives over their career, the editor decides to broadcast the information without approval. As a result, the authorities announced an embargo on the exportation of grain.

This scenario presents a complex ethical dilemma, deeply rooted in the tension between journalistic integrity, government accountability, and humanitarian urgency. Let’s dissect the situation and explore its implications:

Deepening the analysis:

• Power dynamics and corruption:

• The scenario highlights the potential for corruption and self-preservation within developing democracies. The government’s desire to suppress information to avoid scrutiny suggests a lack of transparency and accountability.
• The connection between the grain merchants, the government’s foreign aid sources, and the intended export market implies a network of vested interests that prioritise profit over human life. This reveals a systemic problem that extends beyond a simple news story.

• The role of the media in developing democracies:

• In fragile democracies, the media often plays a crucial role in holding power to account. This scenario tests the limits of that role.
• The editor’s decision to bypass protocol underscores the potential for government-controlled media to act as a voice for the marginalised, even at great personal risk.
• The fact that the commissioner sent the press release directly to the editor shows that some members of the government system are willing to use the media to do the right thing.

• Ethical considerations:

• The editor faces a classic ethical dilemma: duty to inform versus duty to obey.
• The principle of “do no harm” is central to this situation. By suppressing the information, the editor risks contributing to the suffering of thousands. However, by broadcasting the information, they risk jeopardising their career and potentially destabilising the government.
• The concept of journalistic objectivity is also tested. While the editor must strive for accuracy, they cannot remain neutral in the face of a humanitarian crisis. The need to act as a voice for the voiceless overrides the traditional notion of detached observation.

• The impact of global connections:

• The involvement of foreign aid and export markets underscores the interconnectedness of global issues.
• The actions of international actors can have a profound impact on local populations, particularly in developing countries.
• This situation shows how the global economy can negatively affect local populations.

• The importance of local knowledge:

• The editor’s previous trip to the affected area, and the research they undertook, were vital in understanding the situation. This highlights the importance of journalists getting out into the field, and not just relying on press releases.

• The fragility of “success”:

• While the editor kept their job, and the embargo was placed on the grain, this does not mean that the underlying problems have been solved. The same situation could easily occur again.

Analysing the options:

• Referral up:

• This option is the most conventional, but it carries the risk of inaction. The editor’s suspicion that the request would be blocked is likely well-founded.
• This choice displays the editors attempt to follow the correct procedures.

• Broadcast without approval:

• This option is the most courageous, but it also carries the greatest risk. It requires the editor to prioritise human life over their career.
• This option shows that sometimes, direct action is needed.

• Passing information to foreign media:

• This option is a compromise, but it relies on the willingness of foreign media to act. It also potentially absolves the local media of its responsibility.
• This option shows an attempt to get the information out, without taking the full risk.

• Ignoring the story:

• This option is the most unethical. It represents a failure of journalistic duty and a betrayal of the public trust.
• This option shows the danger of apathy.

Conclusion:

This scenario serves as a powerful reminder of the ethical challenges faced by journalists in developing democracies. It highlights the importance of courage, integrity, and a commitment to serving the public interest. The editor’s decision to broadcast the information, despite the risks, is a testament to the power of journalism to make a difference. However, it also underscores the need for systemic change to ensure that such acts of bravery are not necessary.

The post Testing boundaries – scenario first appeared on Media Helping Media.