Comments on: When CYA can BYA

By: Martyn Allan

Martyn Allan — Sun, 17 May 2009 18:07:53 +0000

Perhaps the Wall Street journal would like to offer their perspective in this forum…

By: Blijf uit de buurt van Twitter, zegt WSJ

Blijf uit de buurt van Twitter, zegt WSJ — Sun, 17 May 2009 16:59:58 +0000

[...] Probleem is: de WSJ had moeten uitleggen hoe je als nieuw medium met je lezers kunt omgaan. Zoals Jeff Jarvis het zei: This memo was all about how Journal journalists may – or actually may not – communicate, [...]

By: MediaBlog

MediaBlog — Sun, 17 May 2009 06:57:36 +0000

By: Giornalisti, gente pericolosa – Marco Bardazzi

Giornalisti, gente pericolosa – Marco Bardazzi — Sun, 17 May 2009 03:54:26 +0000

[...] comportamento per i giornalisti sui social media. Il WSJ e’ stato il piu’ rigido, dando direttive che esortano a non fare commenti personali o controversi su Twitter o su servizi simili, a non [...]

By: fred wilson

fred wilson — Sun, 17 May 2009 00:53:01 +0000

thanks for the link Jeff

i am so upset about this turn of events

i grew up with the WSJ and the NYT

they are like my corner deli

and they are just totally blowing it

ugh

By: Angela Connor

Angela Connor — Sat, 16 May 2009 21:22:46 +0000

Excellent perspective. I can only hope that the rigidity and culture of never reversing a decision to keep anyone from looking bad is ultimately relaxed and they realize that social media guidelines will be fluid in the beginning. They need to figure out how to engage readers without compromising their journalistic integrity which in my opinion is the main thing to protect. The opportunities for journalists are endless in social media. It just takes some thought and an alignment with your goals that does not create sucho horible restrictions. Hope they see that before it’s too late. There is still an opportunity here to make this right. That’s the beauty of it all.
Angela Connor | @communitygirl

By: Jeff Jarvis

Jeff Jarvis — Sat, 16 May 2009 17:52:46 +0000

Fixed. thanks. Suddenly the link command in WordPress has a delay that’s tripping me.

By: rex eagle

rex eagle — Sat, 16 May 2009 17:43:42 +0000

It’s the lawyers charge to delay, confuse, muddle and extend involvement into a process(Fees). Progress and evolvement is a threat which must be conveyed to clients(newspapers), even at the risk of clients becoming outdated and irrevelent. It’s obvious why openess is a threat to the old guard.

By: erik martin

erik martin — Sat, 16 May 2009 17:35:27 +0000

FYI, the kerfuffling link doesn’t link.

By: LJ

LJ — Sat, 16 May 2009 17:08:16 +0000

I’m not a journalist; a lawyer, yes. Nice work! You’ve nailed it. Here’s how I view it: if a journalist has written a strong piece, has followed basic ethical rules in production of the piece; and its integrity cannot be questioned, that is the strongest protection for the journalist. Too often the protection to “try and fail” is not rewarded, but it’s an important distinction.