So, how has social media impacted the role of the newspaper ombudsman? To find out, I asked Andy Alexander, ombudsman for The Washington Post. Here’s what he had to say:
“In a nutshell, The Post’s expansion of social media platforms has significantly impacted my job as ombudsman. First, as you mentioned, it’s provided many additional avenues for Post readers to interact with me, as well as Post journalists. But beyond that, the expansion has meant that Post readers simply have much more to react to. When I began as ombudsman in early 2009, the vast majority of reader reaction was to content that appeared in the printed Post (and was then replicated on its Website). Now, I hear constantly from readers who are reacting to Post blogs, Tweets, videos or photo galleries,” he said.
“This expansion of social media also has raised many more ethical issues for me to write about. For example, I’ve written about Post editors and reporters who unwisely Tweeted personal opinions. I wrote an entire column about one of The Post’s premier sports columnists who foolishly decided to Tweet a known falsehood to see if other media would pick up on his fabrication (unfortunately, they did). I’ve also written about standards for verifying aggregated material on The Post’s Website, as well as problems with correcting errors online. My two-year term as ombudsman ends late this month. I suspect if you put this question to my successor in a few years, he or she will tell you that the ombudsman reacts to social media content much more than what appears in the printed Post. It’s changing that fast.”
Newspapers & Social Media 
Journalism has a changing face and for many it is hard to recognize what it has become.
I hear you…Thanks for your comment…
Indeed, often what appears in the social media dimension of newspapers is juicier and more interesting than the original stories… however, one must always take into account the source. Already, it is clear that news coverage by the media is filtered through numerous screens of political propaganda and commercial interests – leaving one to wonder what, if any, truth is actually getting through.
At least with blogs and social media the writers are clear about their biases. With the media in many countries, especially in the United States, the newspapers, radio and television news sources claim to be objective (read: we report, you decide), whereas in actual fact they are anything but. I much prefer the case in most European countries where the papers align themselves with the right or left and advertise themselves as such (ie. the right in France will read le Figaro, whereas the left in the UK will read The Guardian…).
Thanks for your comment. I agree that the discussions via social media can be really engaging, but I think some blogs and other social media platforms are quite biased and that that is not necessarily declared. It’s interesting the way that newspapers in Europe align themselves and then like-minded people read the newspapers that reflect their views, but I think there is a danger in that. At least with the so-called objective attempts at journalism in the elite press in the states, you get a diversity of viewpoints, which is so important in democracies.
I wonder if Social Media has changed the way the public views the role of the ombudsman. Is everyone (via social media) now an ombudsman, of sorts? Having full respect for the value of mainstream media (particularly newspapers) employing ombudsmen, I once argued that student newspapers also should have ombudsmen. At the time, no one agreed with that notion. Has Social Media taken up the slack?
Thanks for your comment. Good questions raised…What do people think?