‘Off the record ‘ tweet about Facebook sparks debate
The news that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t care about Facebook users’ privacy was pretty interesting if a little jarring yesterday morning.
The way that Nick Bilton, lead technology writer at The New York Times, shared it for his nearly 11,000 Twitter followers was a little jarring for journalists. “Off the record” chat for most of us means the reporter cannot use the information.
Within the next two hours, Bilton tried to clarify what he meant by “off the record”.
He tweeted: “‘Off record’ means there is no attribution to who it is but conversation can be used in story. ‘On background’ means I can not repeat it.” In fact, he got that backwards. ”
His final Twitter salvo on the issue spelled out what he believed was understood between his source and himself: “For the record: My source said it was OK to quote them, just not say who they are. (I ALWAYS discuss attribution in interviews.)”
And that is a good point. We don’t know who Bilton’s source was (thank goodness), but if he understood the words “off the record” meant “just don’t use my name,” he was as confused as Bilton.
Journalists have a lot of sources all who have varying degrees of sophistication in dealing with the media. If reporters are getting these terms confused, think about the source who rarely talks with a reporter.
There are lots of places to go to review your own understanding of these terms. But it is also important to spell out what you mean and make sure you and your source understand how you are planning to use their information.
- NYU Journalism Handbook
- Reuters: Essentials of Sourcing
- Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics
- American Journalism Review: Off the Record
Now, Mrs. Lincoln, let’s get back to that issue of Facebook privacy…
