There are times in a journalist’s career when you are going to have to approach someone who is not having the finest moment of their life, and ask them to help you.
It might be calling on a grieving family, or approaching witnesses to an accident, or asking someone who has just emerged the loser in a tussle with Justice to talk about How They Feel. The outcomes are sometimes unedifying, occasionally unpleasant but – more often than the non-journalist might credit – can also be mutually successful and beneficial.
These interactions were also largely unwitnessed, except by those participating. They happened behind closed doors, or, more accurately, on doorsteps – whether you got inside said door or not hinged, no pun intended, on how you conducted yourself, and represented your intentions. I called it the Black Edged Voice and it would be employed for death knocks (low, respectful tone, apologetic demeanour for intruding, much stressing of the fact that I would leave if the door-answerer wished, and would not return) and I was more often than not invited in. I would interview the person or family; I would do my utmost to do justice to their dear one with a tribute. My goal was to give them a cutting that they would come to regard as a mini-memorial.
Every newsroom had reporters who were ‘good on the knock’ – I suspect it comes down to empathy… and luck.
Things started to change in… I’m going to go out on a limb and say 2008, because that was when the first pebbles of social media sliding down a slope became a rumbling avalanche. In 2009 this happened, which gave me a personal insight into how my old-school ‘contacts’ had become my (much-wider) network and a plane crashed in the Hudson and (most) mainstream media suddenly got what was going on.
Now, when a news break happens, you can bank on Twitter being at the heart of it in some way, and often that’s because it’s where the witnesses are.
If I’m passing a huge traffic snarl-up on the M6 my instinct is to photograph or video it and post it on Twitter with a hashtag (from the passenger seat, officer, of course) – my natural instinct is to share. And it’s a common mindset; whether you’re wondering what the noises overhead are, or seeing the Clutha tragedy unfold sharing the experience on networks is now a common thing.
But as a witness, or someone who acknowledges a connection to someone caught up in a newsworthy event, when you share that on Twitter you invite reaction, and a side effect of that is that the massed ranks of media are likely going to be in your @ mentions within minutes, asking for a) your content or b) an interview or c) probably both.
For a journalist, it means these interactions are happening in the world; they aren’t behind closed doors or in a one-to-one exchange on a doorstep – you’re asking your questions on Twitter and onlookers may well view them as intrusive. It’s not necessarily pretty but that’s beside the point – asking the questions, respectfully, within the Editors’ Code of Conduct, and knowing that varieties of “NO” may be the comeback are part of the job.
There are two problems: Dozens of other media may well be @-ing the same “can we [use your photo, speak to you, ask you to put us i touch with X]?”; others witnessing the Twitter scrum get outraged (sometimes with good reason) and start throwing abuse back. This will usually include references to vultures, lazy journalism, disgrace etc etc.
This week’s Smiler crash saw a spate of no-closed-doors journalism approaches. Mercifully no one died, although the terrible injuries (I would imagine mental as well as physical) suffered by those caught up in it meant it was an incredibly sensitive story to stage a “can we have…” media grabfest on Twitter.
@BBC_HaveYourSay yes there now. Was in the queue— Kirsty Wild (@kirstythewild) June 2, 2015
@kirstythewild Hi Kirsty, am I able to give you a call about this for Yahoo News?— Nikki Barr (@_ikkin_) June 2, 2015
@kirstythewild Thanks so much for speaking with me, take care of yourself!— Nikki Barr (@_ikkin_) June 2, 2015
@_ikkin_ no worries :)— Kirsty Wild (@kirstythewild) June 2, 2015
There are scores of these exchanges – I imagine her mentions column was in meltdown. She obviously was sanguine about the journalists who approached her (although if you read the full exchanges, it shifts from journalists asking for interviews to some fairly nasty tweets from non-media, taking her to task for the original tweet).
But there are also variations on a theme of this
And it wasn’t unique – other people tweeting photos were getting similar requests, and similar views were being expressed
Check out the responses to that tweet. Journalist are vultures. Remember when one called Nicely Pearson a bully? lol https://t.co/V6O7YyNe4s— MackAttack (@MackAtttack) June 3, 2015
Is it fair? No. Do they have a point? Yes. Am I contradicting myself? Sorry but I don’t care.
The press diving in like vultures on the girl who took a pic of The Smiler at Alton Towers pic.twitter.com/RcAzTFgWBu— Liam Edwards (@LiamPLEdwards) June 2, 2015
Publicly requesting content like this is a legitimate part of the journalist’s job, while taking photos without asking is obviously not; and yes, it can look shoddy to the wider world. That’s ok – most of us don’t come into this job to win an award for our high-minded purpose and nobility, we come into it to tell stories and let people know things they otherwise wouldn’t. If someone wants to tell a journalist their story because said hack asked the right questions, politely, mindfully and within the Code of Conduct, that’s a valid exchange.
When it fails is when the question is posed in a crass way, or we barge into exchanges between friends, because we had a Tweetdeck search running. The above tweeter posted her content and opinion to broadcast it – she was happy for journalists to amplify the message. But an enormous amount of Twitter users don’t understand the network, or think that when they @ a friend, it’s not public. Leaping into what they think is a private exchange is a bit like opening the front door and walking in the room to ask if you can interview the grieving family, without knocking.
Just observe for a few moments and follow the conversation – you’ll soon work out whether it’s something you can step into (or another journalist will jump first, and you can take a cue from the reaction). Being first isn’t a great thing when all you’ve achieved is a mentions column of abuse, and retweets with added angry comments. It damages you, the brand you work for, and the wider journalism community.
When you’re using Twitter to find witnesses, treat it like a door knock. Sometimes, in real life, the journalism pack gets there first and you can ask them what reception they’ve got so far. On Twitter, a couple of minutes of observing conversations, or watching others rush in to the breach, can be very valuable.
Knock at the metaphorical door if you think it’s appropriate, and be prepared to have it shut in your face – or to have someone else tell you to clear out.
But if you aren’t respectful, or you don’t conduct yourself in a way that reflects well on you and the title you represent (quick sense check: How would you react if you were the person you’re about to approach?) you can expect to get flung off the metaphorical doorstep and land in a heap.
Alison Gow is a journalist and digital innovations editor for Trinity Mirror Regionals.
Free daily newsletter
- How the BBC is using Hearken for crowd-powered journalism
- The UGC hub at the BBC builds trust with readers by involving them in the reporting
- Tip: How to prevent female reporters from becoming targets of abuse on social media
- Why publishers should take measures to prevent a moral panic over virtual reality
- Why moral panic could be detrimental to the virtual reality industry