Organisations have to abandon their do-no-harm approach to sensitive issues as journalists take a stand on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Front page of The New York Times, Friday May 28 (Image: Supplied)

Overnight, the global to-and-fro between journalists and media institutions over social media came home to Canberra with the attack on the ABC’s policy (and, in particular, a since-deleted tweet from its gallery star Laura Tingle) by unelected Liberal Senator Sarah Henderson.

Trouble is, institutional social media policies in journalism are the application of the corporate human resources aesthetic to the integrity of the craft. They exist to protect the organisation, not the journalist.

Right now, that to-and-fro is playing out in the predictable blow-ups over how to cover the Israel-Palestine conflict in the age of social media, long seemingly approached with one big question in mind: can we just get through this without getting the organisation into trouble?

Want to read more about the obligations of journalists?

Already a subscriber? .
Or, register your email address for a FREE 21-day trial.





Source link