Journalists, lies and message boards

[lipstix]

Hi everyone.

I was hoping you could help me out with a question I have. I'm going to keep it hypothetical, though, because I don't want to make anyone any more mad than they already might be or get anyone into trouble, myself included.

The question is regarding journalists and the internet, specifically message boards (but not just this one). I'm asking you guys because I assume most of you are journalists and obviously you know about messsage boards.

Anyway, what are your opinions on journalists creating fictitious personalities on a message board? What if a fairly well-known media personality is caught by a coworker and/or their employer anonymously making stuff up about their background, their family, their relationships, etc. Basically creating a fantasy world and persona and going through a lot of trouble to maintain the fiction. Is that alone enough to discredit that journalists' real-life credibility?

What if that journalist has been found to comment on their own stories, talking about how good they are, etc.?

If you found your coworker doing this stuff would you say something to him/her or to your employer?

Are any of these events reason for termination in your eyes? How far is too far?

Thank you for your help.

I'll hang up and listen.

 

[cluelesswonder]

reporter in pa. got fired for doing this a few years ago.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002500225

 

[Screwball]

Columnist demoted to reporter at LA Times:

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/04/hiltzik_loses_column.php

(He eventually got his column back, years later)

 

[Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!]

Hi everyone.

I was hoping you could help me out with a question I have. I'm going to keep it hypothetical, though, because I don't want to make anyone any more mad than they already might be or get anyone into trouble, myself included.

The question is regarding journalists and the internet, specifically message boards (but not just this one). I'm asking you guys because I assume most of you are journalists and obviously you know about messsage boards.

Anyway, what are your opinions on journalists creating fictitious personalities on a message board? What if a fairly well-known media personality is caught by a coworker and/or their employer anonymously making stuff up about their background, their family, their relationships, etc. Basically creating a fantasy world and persona and going through a lot of trouble to maintain the fiction. Is that alone enough to discredit that journalists' real-life credibility?

What if that journalist has been found to comment on their own stories, talking about how good they are, etc.?

If you found your coworker doing this stuff would you say something to him/her or to your employer?

Are any of these events reason for termination in your eyes? How far is too far?

Thank you for your help.

I'll hang up and listen.

Welcome to SportsJournalists.com!

 

[ADodgen]

While I can't imagine wanting to expend the energy to create a fictitious online life, I'd say that with regard to someone's integrity as a journalist, they are absolutely shredding it by allowing that online persona to interact with their real life one in such a disingenuous way.

 

[lipstix]

Thanks, Mr. Redenbacher.

And thank you guys for the links. The L.A. Times piece was particularly insightful. But I was also hoping for some opinions on top of the case studies.

Obviously using anonymity to strike back at the people your cover is wrong, but outside of that what would you do if you found out someone was on here under a completely fake persona? Is there something wrong with that, or am I making a mistake by asking anonymous journalists on a message board for an unbiased answer about journalists on message boards?

PS. Just saw your response. Thank you, ADodgen.

 

[GB-Hack]

Thanks, Mr. Redenbacher.

And thank you guys for the links. The L.A. Times piece was particularly insightful. But I was also hoping for some opinions on top of the case studies.

Obviously using anonymity to strike back at the people your cover is wrong, but outside of that what would you do if you found out someone was on here under a completely fake persona? Is there something wrong with that, or am I making a mistake by asking anonymous journalists on a message board for an unbiased answer about journalists on message boards?

PS. Just saw your response. Thank you, ADodgen.

Well, there is even a gray area here, even on this site.

I believe in the past there have been users who have used more than one username, there may still be those that do, and there are some usernames here -- some of which are actual athletes, except they aren't -- that are used for comic effect.

For example: http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/members/10394/

As for why, you'd likely have to get someone to 'fess up to doing it in the past or currently, and get that from them.

 

[lipstix]

Mr. GB, by persona I mean more than just creating a username for the sake of satire. I would hope my job would not be in jeopardy because I logged on a message board as TigerWoods1 and made a couple of driver jokes - except maybe if I covered him all of the time.

By persona, I mean creating a fictional character and maintaining that persona with fictional stories and fictional relationships basically meant to deliberately deceive others.

On one hand, you ask yourself who you're hurting. But on the other hand you wonder if that's behavior appropriate for someone who requires some integrity - with obvious exceptions - to do this job.

 

[Shoeless Joe]

I am not and do not claim to be THE Shoeless Joe Jackson. He died 20 years before I was born.

Wait a minute. Yes I am. Yeah, yeah. And Buck Weaver on here, he and I played together. That's the ticket. Friggin Comiskey.

 

[zagoshe]

Correct me if I am wrong but -- isn't one of the reasons the "other" board came to be is some posters were pissed off that a person around here allegedly threatened to go to one of their bosses and out them or something?

 

[spikechiquet]

I am not and do not claim to be THE Shoeless Joe Jackson. He died 20 years before I was born.

Wait a minute. Yes I am. Yeah, yeah. And Buck Weaver on here, he and I played together. That's the ticket. Friggin Comiskey.

Still waiting to see that 5K from my great-great uncle Eddie for hitting the first batter in the '19 Series.

Side note...anyone read "The Original Curse" about the 1918 Cubs/Sox series?

 

[Voodoo Chile]

Before our paper was online we used to have a "My Two Cents" column where readers could call in and leave voicemail messages for publication. My editor at the time called in with a fictitious name to dispute some quotes in a story I wrote.

 

[Hammer Pants]

Correct me if I am wrong but -- isn't one of the reasons the "other" board came to be is some posters were pissed off that a person around here allegedly threatened to go to one of their bosses and out them or something?

No. Several months between the two events.

 

[ADodgen]

Thanks, Mr. Redenbacher.

And thank you guys for the links. The L.A. Times piece was particularly insightful. But I was also hoping for some opinions on top of the case studies.

Obviously using anonymity to strike back at the people your cover is wrong, but outside of that what would you do if you found out someone was on here under a completely fake persona? Is there something wrong with that, or am I making a mistake by asking anonymous journalists on a message board for an unbiased answer about journalists on message boards?

PS. Just saw your response. Thank you, ADodgen.

I think that there are probably degrees of acceptability within all of this. I don't think you'll find anyone here who has a problem with the notion of permitting people a certain amount of anonymity online. It makes sense for reasons of personal security, but also makes sense if you have an issue at your place of employment, or want to be able to comment on the industry without someone having a preconceived idea of what your position is.

I'm not even sure that I have a problem with someone inventing a wholly different life/background/story/persona online. To some extent, that's their business, regardless of their occupation.

Where you lose me, though, is this idea that I could invent a person and then use them to bolster my own real-life endeavors. I can't imagine making up a bunch of fake e-mail addresses and having them comment on my blog so that visitors get the feeling that I'm very popular. Nor can I imagine the situation Voodoo Chile describes, in which a colleague would handle an internal issue that way.

Those are the things that should get you expelled from the business, maybe forever.

 

[lipstix]

Correct me if I am wrong but -- isn't one of the reasons the "other" board came to be is some posters were pissed off that a person around here allegedly threatened to go to one of their bosses and out them or something?

No. Several months between the two events.

So it sounds as though there's some history around here with this. Does that have to do with board members fighting other board members or is it more of what I'm talking about?

And again, Mr. Dodgen replies before me with a great post.

Thank you.

 

[txsportsscribe]

I mean creating a fictional character and maintaining that persona with fictional stories and fictional relationships basically meant to deliberately deceive others.

nobody here would do this.

 

[ADodgen]

Correct me if I am wrong but -- isn't one of the reasons the "other" board came to be is some posters were pissed off that a person around here allegedly threatened to go to one of their bosses and out them or something?

No. Several months between the two events.

So it sounds as though there's some history around here with this. Does that have to do with board members fighting other board members or is it more of what I'm talking about?

And again, Mr. Dodgen replies before me with a great post.

Thank you.

I appreciate your kind words, but in the interest of making my online persona match my real life one, it's Ms. Dodgen. :D

 

[lipstix]

Correct me if I am wrong but -- isn't one of the reasons the "other" board came to be is some posters were pissed off that a person around here allegedly threatened to go to one of their bosses and out them or something?

No. Several months between the two events.

So it sounds as though there's some history around here with this. Does that have to do with board members fighting other board members or is it more of what I'm talking about?

And again, Mr. Dodgen replies before me with a great post.

Thank you.

I appreciate your kind words, but in the interest of making my online persona match my real life one, it's Ms. Dodgen. :D

Oh, I'm so sorry. That occurred to me as I wrote that but I obviously guessed wrong. :)

 

[ADodgen]

Correct me if I am wrong but -- isn't one of the reasons the "other" board came to be is some posters were pissed off that a person around here allegedly threatened to go to one of their bosses and out them or something?

No. Several months between the two events.

So it sounds as though there's some history around here with this. Does that have to do with board members fighting other board members or is it more of what I'm talking about?

And again, Mr. Dodgen replies before me with a great post.

Thank you.

I appreciate your kind words, but in the interest of making my online persona match my real life one, it's Ms. Dodgen. :D

Oh, I'm so sorry. That occurred to me as I wrote that but I obviously guessed wrong. :)

No worries. It's more amusing than anything. Always funny when someone with a nondescript name turns out to be a woman here. Always causes a bit of a double take.

 

[GB-Hack]

No worries. It's more amusing than anything. Always funny when someone with a nondescript name turns out to be a woman here. Always causes a bit of a double take.

And of course now I notice your baseline link...