Assignment #3

For this task, we were to read this article: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/internet_names_.html

The internet and to some extent blogs create many ethical challenges for the world of media. Kevin Poulsen's piece attempts to maintain some form of ethics by not "being the first to name" the suspected shooter. Much to the chagrin of some of his posters, Poulsen takes the stance of the informer of a situation, not a potential link in a wild chain of speculation. Many news organizations would do well to do the same.

Some sites like CNN.com offer what they call Developing News stories. These range from continued updates to stories that have been going on for some time (like the coverage of the terrible shootings at Virginia Tech currently) or simply new stories that the facts are unclear about. In examples of the latter the website may change facts constantly over a period of minutes, hours, or days, to the point where the original story is no longer discernable amongst the truth that has come out. Is this good or bad?

During the day of the shootings, I personally viewed CNN.com many times over the course of the day, and the story changed as was approproate as facts came out. I also happened to watch several news reports on broadcast television, which were reporting the same facts at the same time as they came out. In this instance, using a "developing story" format to make what can be considered a "live" broadcast on a website factually as accurate as possible is fine. Where the line must be drawn is the same place where this article drew it, however.

Rather than posting the unclear shooters name, a fact which could have permanently damaged his reputation, Wired's writer simply reported all the facts he had at the time. He reported what was going on, that he had spoken to someone who he then identified by the name that he was given, and moved on from the story. This is a good example of proper ethical thinking in action. Of course, being that the stories on the website like that have a comment bar at the bottom, several "clever" readers of the article simply posted the man's name themselves. This, however, will surely always be seen as less credible than if a major publication had done it.

This brings us to another question. The question revolving around what it must have been like to be on the other side of the coin. With the possibility of this occurring to anyone at any time one has to consider what kind of representation of themselves they want online. What if the shootings were at OU, and it was leaked that the shooter was a large white male, wearing shorts on an otherwise cold day? Well, anyone from OU Tcom or any of my old friends could have easily put 2 + 2 together and thought "hmm, is Matt in class today?" Now if you know me personally, you'll probably know that i'm not a supporter of guns in any way, but sometimes minds wander under stress. I do say some outlandish things from time to time.

Sites like Facebook and Myspace can serve as functional online additions to a resume or website. Used in the proper light, they can show the activities and interests of a person without alluding to personal or private information. However, a Facebook page with 257 links to what is basically the same picture of you and your friends drinking, is probably not a good addition to your online presence. Now, more than ever before, it is possible to set privacy checks that allow you to keep your information "Friends Only" or in some cases even completely private, however, crafty people looking to find out more about you can find ways to bypass most of this security. For a while, there was a concern because potential employers can have a facebook page, and many do. So yes, your potential sweet job interview with big firm in big city, may be foiled when they see that picture of you that you thought "was the sweetest profile picture of you ever" from that "one underwear party you went to" on that night that also happened to be "edward 40's hands" night. If you haven't thought about this yet, its never too late to start looking ahead.