A Blog-Poster’s Code of Ethics
Nov 16th, 2009 • Posted in: Commentaryby Rushworth M. Kidder
If you’re in search of scurrilous, spiteful, and vilifying prose, the nation’s archives of political writing are a fine place to start. In the eighteenth century, the framers of the U.S. Constitution faced all manner of calumny in the newspapers of their day. The slavery debates of the nineteenth century were rancid with verbal abuse. By the early twentieth century, yellow journalism was as drenched in vituperative accusation as it was devoid of verifiable accuracy.
But I suspect that none of this holds a candle to today’s nastiness. What surfaces in commentary programs on cable television and talk radio is just a hint. The mother lode of negativity surely lies in the blogosphere. Hour by hour, it seems, the postings by bloggers — and especially the responses from their readers — are laying down sedimentary layers of unverified and anonymous attack that will provide sobering core samples for future historians.
Perhaps that’s not surprising. We’re living through an unprecedented period in which every citizen can be a “published” commentator. If you want your voice heard, you no longer need to buy a printing press, create a distribution network, and build a corral of writers — or win the approval of those who have such things. In the web’s great democratization of information, you simply go online and articulate your views for the world. And in response, your readers offer their views, which often garner responses themselves — creating vast threads of conversation that range from constructive commentary to blistering negativity to poisonous inanity.
All of this has caused me to be deeply grateful for the readers of Ethics Newsline®. In our decade of existence, we’ve attracted exceptionally thoughtful letters. Our readers bring to the table high standards of values, ethics, and character. They expect such standards in our writing, and they return it to us in the civility of their comments.
And that set me thinking. What if we could capture and codify those standards? Could we begin to make a difference to blog postings — and readers’ comments — everywhere?
Since we’ve recently added a reader response function to Ethics Newsline, it made sense to start at home by setting out the standards we expect. We’re not seeking to correct past problems — as I say, happily we’ve been mostly free from the blogosphere’s excesses. But we do want to emphasize our commitment to solution-oriented journalism. We want to invite into the conversation those who care more about progress than blame. And we want to reinforce our purpose, which is to elevate awareness of and support for the ethical principles that underlie civil society.
So here’s a draft of “A Blog-Poster’s Code of Ethics”:
As a resident of a global community of engaged thinkers, I agree to abide by the five shared values that create and sustain communities everywhere:
RESPECT. Communities depend on mutual respect. In my posts, I will respect the dignity, motivation, and intelligence of others at all times. I will neither engage in personal attacks or derogatory comments, nor tolerate those who do. While I welcome vigorous and strong debate, I will nevertheless strive to maintain civility in the face of disagreement and reasonableness in the presence of polarization.
RESPONSIBILITY. Communities comprise identifiable, recognizable individuals. I will take responsibility for what I write, using my own name rather than hiding behind the anonymity of an avatar or pseudonym. If I absolutely must remain anonymous, I will consult the editors to ensure that they know my identity and that readers know why I am not using my name.
HONESTY. Communities thrive on transparency. I will strive for candor, openness, and truth telling in my posts. I will avoid gossip, innuendo, unsourced data, and deceptive spin, but will seek to reflect accuracy, completeness, and relevance — the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth — in my comments.
FAIRNESS. Communities require the even-handed application of justice. I will seek always to represent issues as fairly as possible, honoring arguments on both sides even as I seek to persuade others to choose my side. But I will strive to avoid bias, discrimination, and misrepresentation, and will courageously expose bigotry and prejudice where I find it.
COMPASSION. Communities prosper through mutual caring. I will strive to use my posts to elevate and ennoble, rather than to lambaste, tear down, or harshly criticize others. Seeking to promote kindliness and good will, I will treat other people and their ideas with the same sense of caring attention I would want from them.
We’d like to feature this code as a standing part of our response page, asking readers to click the “I agree” box before posting a comment. And we’d like to see this code, or something like it, taken up by other blogs. But first we’d like to hear from you. So please tell us what you think.
©2009 Institute for Global Ethics
Find this and previous weeks’ commentaries online as a podcast titled now available on . Subscribe today!
Print This Story
Email This Story
Rush – This is a good and needed piece of the social networking puzzle. What a great idea to have people agree to abide by the code before posting. There’s certainly room in the blogosphere for difficult and thought-provoking topics without disrespect and dishonesty. Thanks very much for working through this for us. Best regards!
This is indeed a good and needed document. Hopefully it can steer us back toward civility in public discourse. I particularly like the ‘Responsibility’ canon. Anonymity often emboldens, providing impetus to behave and speak in ways that drag civil discourse to the gutter. This would be a good policy for the comments section in our hometown paper’s online forum. Thanks for putting this together.
Your comments on biased views and opinions is totally ad rem. Thanks so much for the Code of Ethics proposed. I am in total agreement. Joseph Dannemiller, Spring Lake. Michigan
Hi Rush,
Your column is bang on, though I must admit, from my own experience of the blogosphere, it would probably reduce almost all of the political writing by at least two-thirds. And it would eliminate much of it altogether. Both the anonymity and the lack of responsibility are major causes of this, along with the “rights centred” attitude of much of North American society today which constantly chants “rights” while never admitting to responsibility. Cheers, Art Gans+
This is a good start; the issue will be to get such a code of conduct adopted.
You might go a step further and consider an article or book on Etiquette for the Electronic Age. There are times when a phone call is more appropriate than an email and vice versa. Twittering has its own issues. The new technology raises a slew of ethical and social issues that few people consider. An example is my son’s web page, futureme.com, which has almost a million hits, and has been published in book form. This provides a venue for an email to be delivered to yourself in the future. Should that be viewed by others? How about if it includes a threat of murder, rape or suicide? Another example is use of i-phones with GIS, which will soon allow tracking of an individual’s specific location. What is the obligation of purveyors of these services to governments and individuals? While legislation is often the vehicle to address these issues, ethics is, as Rush reminds us, “obedience to the unenforceable.” In the electronic age, codes are often unenforceable.
While I agree with Peter that obedience to ethics codes may be unenforceable, there is no reason why the process of ethical education and compliance can’t be transparent. The proposed code is an excellent place to start. However, looking ahead, it may be wise to give some thought to ways alleged ethical violations are handled. An open forum where possible ethical lapses are identified and opportunities for improvement (either for the individual or for the code itself) are provided, would be another very welcome enhancement of this board. Perhaps some type of “wiki ethics” model could be developed that allows contributors to self-regulate in the service of increased civility and thoughtful discussion.
(Also sent via e-mail)
I think having a Code of Ethics for posting on blogs is a great idea. I know you are striving to educate as well as ask for commitment; however, if this is to be more universally accepted, I think it needs to be distilled to the conduct portion. In some cases that may actually be independent of the reasoning, or there might be other reasons people would use to support their commitment.
I also think that commiting to using your actual name in all posts is going a bit far. There are legitimate reasons for not doing that. (Personally, I don’t want to take a chance on having blogosphere denizens tracking me down outside of that forum!) But there are ways to be “recognizable,” and my rewrite acknowledges that.
So, here is my suggestion for a shortened, conduct-based version:
In my communications, I agree to abide by these values that create and sustain healthy communities:
RESPECT. I will respect the dignity, motivation, and intelligence of others. I will not engage in personal attacks or make derogatory comments. I will welcome debate and remain civil when I disagree.
RESPONSIBILITY. I will take responsibility for what I write, using my own name or a consistent screen/user name as appropriate for the particular venue.
HONESTY. I will be honest, accurate, complete, and relevant in my posts. I will avoid gossip, innuendo, unsourced data, and deceptive spin.
FAIRNESS. I will represent issues as fairly as possible, honoring arguments on both sides even if I seek to persuade others to choose one side. I will strive to avoid discrimination and misrepresentation, and will expose any bigotry or prejudice I find.
COMPASSION. I will use my posts to elevate and ennoble, rather than to tear down or criticize. I will treat others and their ideas with the same sense of caring attention I would like from them.
All the best to you!
Sher O
(Fort Worth, TX)
Excellent stuff, and it would be even better if it were 1/3 as long (I’d accept a “read more” link after each very short statement. As it is, it’s a bit burdensome for people to read, and way too much to remember. But a huge step forward.
Thank you for the ethics code. I’m a novice when it comes to internet blogging. However your common sense golden rule logic seems right to me. After reading the thoughtful and constructive comments of others, I found myself thinking “is this (code) a ‘voice crying in the wilderness’ or has the ‘time for thinkers come’”. Perhaps the recent growth in the “ethics industry” indicates a beneath the surface movement toward “obedience to the unenforceable”.
A Pressure Release Valve. Perhaps a blogger just won’t be able to hold back. The blogger could identify those passages which are “ethical” and then provide a “Disclaimer : The Following is Unethical” and I just have to get this off my chest.
It’s the quintessence of the ethical code. What’s not to like ?
Thank you for posting this. I believe that it is becoming increasingly important to instill a sense of universal ethics into all avenues of human activity. Blogging, and the internet in general, is no different. Indeed, in many respects, it is further behind than most spheres because of the sense of anonymity and ‘anything goes’ attitude that often comes along with our use of the internet.
I have highlighted your post on our blog, Future Conscience, as we have recently done a series on ethical blogging that covered many different practical aspects of blogging in detail. When we all have the opportunity to have our voice heard, it is important to ensure as much as possible that we use it responsibly and in a way that makes the internet a better place for all those who use it.
Sounds ideal. and the 1/3 or 2/3 number these posts predict it will eliminate are probably the unproductive and only insulting ones anyway. but how legally binding is this code? Even I, who agree with all of it, would be weary of checking a box if it meant what I write could be interpreted wrong and lead to lawsuits instead of web insults. And what about on a website that is itself inherently biased?
I’m compelled to comment on your most recent Ethics Newsline® commentary. Wow, what a contribution — to pioneer a code of ethics for blogging. As long as you’re at it, might you craft a version that could serve as a standard for content forwarded by email? It would be a great device to use in asking to be removed from mailing lists of well-meaning friends whose forwards violate the essence of the code you have drafted for bloggers. Objecting to unsolicited emails based on one’s adherence to a standardized code of ethics would be an elegant and inoffensive way of alerting the sender to the underlying issue. Because the delete key is such an expedient way of dealing with unwelcome emails, senders of such material receive no negative feedback about the quality of what’s sent — which is different from the particular viewpoint it represents. And forwarding of substandard material continues unchecked.
Thanks for the continuous flow of high quality material each week!
Bob Snipes, Shepherdstown, WV