Another journalist, another Twitter mea culpa.
This time it’s a Canadian journalist who’s come under fire for remarks made online. CBC’s Jason Davidson is facing criticism, and possible discipline from his employer, for remarks he made on Twitter last week.
According to a report by QMI Agency, Davidson tweeted his frustrations at the fans who booed Montreal Canadiens goaltender Carey Price after he allowed four goal on nine shots.
“OK, separatist Habs fans, stop booing Price. I know it’s idiots of your type,” he tweeted (the tweet has since been removed, with Davidson tweeting he deleted it and “should never have implicated politics, which had nothing to do with hockey.”
Now, Davidson’s not the first journalist to come under fire for remarks made on Twitter, and he likely won’t be the last.
The question here is why are so many journalists unable to avoid this landmine?
Obviously, journalists are human, and therefore are bound to make mistakes. However, social media being just that, media, makes me wonder why journalists don’t seem to have more common sense when it comes to social media.
Journalists are used to being in the public eye and appearing to be unbiased (I say “appearing” because, again, we are human and do have biases — good journalists are just able to toss aside personal opinions when it comes to their work). Good journalists don’t announce who their voting for, what they think of political issues or take a stand when it comes to public policy.
Journalists also are often the ones to witness a private citizen having a meltdown in the press firsthand (i.e. saying things they shouldn’t on the record — sound familiar?), so why does that go out the window when it comes to Twitter?
Perhaps many journalists forget that they are a journalist first and, if they have a Twitter account which they use to tweet for work, they are representing their organization at all times while using that account. Even if journalists are not “officially” tweeting for their employer, by process of association, they are (meaning as far as the public is concerned if you work for CBC, you represent CBC — always).
Was what Davidson did wrong? If he meant it to be Quebec-bashing, then yes. If he was venting because he realized that this was just an exhibition game, meaning Price could have let in nine goals on nine shots and it still wouldn’t stop the Habs from making the playoffs this year, then there’s a bit of a grey area there.
Is it a fireable offence? Well, I don’t think Octavia Nasr should have been fired by CNN for expressing her condolences for the death of Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, so I definitely don’t think Davidson should be either. Should he be disciplined? Undoubtedly, mainly because he should know better (after all, according to his Twitter bio, he sometimes co-hosts on the I-Desk).
Perhaps more educating needs to be done to journalists. Many may not realize that they can’t tweet everything that comes into their heads (it’s not about censoring, but being smart — think of the newsroom humour that many outside of it would not find nearly as funny as those inside it do).
But it also comes down to a journalist’s Twitter voice and followers. The National Post‘s Bruce Arthur often tweets observations that are absurd, wry and sarcastic. But that’s the voice he has developed in his columns and on his Twitter feed — his followers would expect nothing less. (And yes, Arthur has a bit more freedom because he is a columnist.)
Journalists have to remember which side of the microphone they are on and not forget how they have seen so many people say things publicly that they immediately regret.
They don’t want to be one of them.
(Thanks to @travisboisvenue‘s post on MediaStyle for hat-tip.)
The problem with journalists and Twitter
Another journalist, another Twitter mea culpa.
This time it’s a Canadian journalist who’s come under fire for remarks made online. CBC’s Jason Davidson is facing criticism, and possible discipline from his employer, for remarks he made on Twitter last week.
According to a report by QMI Agency, Davidson tweeted his frustrations at the fans who booed Montreal Canadiens goaltender Carey Price after he allowed four goal on nine shots.
“OK, separatist Habs fans, stop booing Price. I know it’s idiots of your type,” he tweeted (the tweet has since been removed, with Davidson tweeting he deleted it and “should never have implicated politics, which had nothing to do with hockey.”
Now, Davidson’s not the first journalist to come under fire for remarks made on Twitter, and he likely won’t be the last.
The question here is why are so many journalists unable to avoid this landmine?
Obviously, journalists are human, and therefore are bound to make mistakes. However, social media being just that, media, makes me wonder why journalists don’t seem to have more common sense when it comes to social media.
Journalists are used to being in the public eye and appearing to be unbiased (I say “appearing” because, again, we are human and do have biases — good journalists are just able to toss aside personal opinions when it comes to their work). Good journalists don’t announce who their voting for, what they think of political issues or take a stand when it comes to public policy.
Journalists also are often the ones to witness a private citizen having a meltdown in the press firsthand (i.e. saying things they shouldn’t on the record — sound familiar?), so why does that go out the window when it comes to Twitter?
Perhaps many journalists forget that they are a journalist first and, if they have a Twitter account which they use to tweet for work, they are representing their organization at all times while using that account. Even if journalists are not “officially” tweeting for their employer, by process of association, they are (meaning as far as the public is concerned if you work for CBC, you represent CBC — always).
Was what Davidson did wrong? If he meant it to be Quebec-bashing, then yes. If he was venting because he realized that this was just an exhibition game, meaning Price could have let in nine goals on nine shots and it still wouldn’t stop the Habs from making the playoffs this year, then there’s a bit of a grey area there.
Is it a fireable offence? Well, I don’t think Octavia Nasr should have been fired by CNN for expressing her condolences for the death of Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, so I definitely don’t think Davidson should be either. Should he be disciplined? Undoubtedly, mainly because he should know better (after all, according to his Twitter bio, he sometimes co-hosts on the I-Desk).
Perhaps more educating needs to be done to journalists. Many may not realize that they can’t tweet everything that comes into their heads (it’s not about censoring, but being smart — think of the newsroom humour that many outside of it would not find nearly as funny as those inside it do).
But it also comes down to a journalist’s Twitter voice and followers. The National Post‘s Bruce Arthur often tweets observations that are absurd, wry and sarcastic. But that’s the voice he has developed in his columns and on his Twitter feed — his followers would expect nothing less. (And yes, Arthur has a bit more freedom because he is a columnist.)
Journalists have to remember which side of the microphone they are on and not forget how they have seen so many people say things publicly that they immediately regret.
They don’t want to be one of them.
(Thanks to @travisboisvenue‘s post on MediaStyle for hat-tip.)