Code of Ethics for Automatic Curation and Aggregation

Working with Scoopinion.com, I have noticed a need for code of ethics for journalistic aggregation. Here is a draft, help me improve it. For richer context, check out the theoretical foundations of the code of ethics for automatic curation (also a work in process).

– – –

RIGHT OF DELIVERY

Everyone has the right to receive information, news and opinions.

RIGHT OF SOURCE TRANSPARENCY

Everyone has the right to easily access original content and sources.

RIGHT OF METHOD TRANSPARENCY

Everyone has the right to know how they can get their voice heard, and the reasoning behind the content that is offered to them.

RIGHT OF PRIVACY

Everyone has the right to know when they are tracked. Further, everyone has the right to easily access and edit and delete the information they have provided.



(The content will be edited based on feedback. Please comment and edit the text at http://muistio.tieke.fi/vwcCOmSfIN)

Introduction

Freedom of speech is in the core of a democratic society. Good journalistic practice allows everyone to receive information and opinions.

Purpose of these guidelines is to support the responsible use of freedom of expression and freedom of delivery of information in the media and to promote professional ethics, and to remind those taking care of the circulatory tasks such as aggregation that they are part of the journalistic ecosystem.

Aggregation and curation mean delivering certain narratives from a large set of possible narratives to a certain audience. This code of ethics is about automatic aggregation and curation that is based on interaction of algorithms, source material and receiving public whose behavior might or might not impact the aggregation algorithms.

In this text, someone taking care of the circulatory task by aggregation or automatic curation is called the Curator.

These instructions have been drafted for industry self-regulation. They are not laws; this code cannot be used as a basis for legal actions.

RIGHT OF DELIVERY

Everyone has the right to receive information, news and opinions. The right of delivery means the ethical requirement to deliver narratives as they have promised, keeping the public interest in mind. At times, delivering the information might be against the public interest.

A curator is responsible to their audience. Readers, listeners and viewers have a right to know what is happening in society.

The Curator must not abuse their position. She shall not address issues involving the personal benefit from the opportunity and does not require or receive any benefits which might compromise the independence or professional ethics.

The Curator has the right to refuse tasks that are contrary to law, personal convictions and professional ethics. There should be a way for the audience to report this kind of content, in which case the Curator must quickly act to check and remove the content if necessary.

Duplication of content is strongly discouraged. If possible, the curator should direct as many viewers as possible to the original content. This often requires providing information about the original content, in which case a moderate use of information about the original content is appropriate.

Information sources must be viewed critically. This is particularly important in controversial issues, because the source of information can gain or cause damage.

Graphic and offensive content should be aggregated in a way that the audience can understand the content type, for example using a NSFW-tag. The Curator should understand cultural differences in what is considered offensive, and provide simple and short explanation about the cultural conventions she follows.

If possible, the Curator must pay attention to possibility that headlines, links and content changes in journalistic content. It is important to update the aggregated content accordingly.

All the public information should not be aggregated. A certain kind of information could be against the public interest. A special care should be taken about the privacy of individuals, especially minors.

RIGHT OF SOURCE TRANSPARENCY

Everyone has the right to easily access original content and sources.

NB: As mentioned by Redditor schnuffs “the only problem with source source transparency is that unnamed sources (for fear of repercussion) are essential to any journalist who wishes to expose anything. It’t not only the journalists rights that you have to consider, it’s also those who could be affected by exposure.”

It is absolutely necessary to mention (and, if possible, link to) the source of the content.

The audience should be able to separate factual and fictional content. Further, the audience should be able to tell apart different sources.

Advertising material should be clearly separated from the aggregated content which is not paid for.

All the mistakes in aggregation including technical failures, clear mistakes by the content producers, missing links and wrong kind of content should be corrected as soon as possible. Corrections should be visible and the audience should be able to trace them back.

RIGHT OF METHOD TRANSPARENCY

Everyone has the right to know how they can get their voice heard.

The decision concerning the curation of content (to share or not to share) is to be made on journalistic grounds with a transparent method. This decision-making should never include a third, active party, which is not mentioned.

The Curator has the right and duty to resist pressure and persuasion that attempts to control, prevent or restrict the flow of information.

The Curator should make an effort to aggregate corrections to previously aggregated stories that were false or one-sided.

The Curator should respect everyone in the audience. Ethnic origin, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, beliefs, or or other similar personal characteristics of an audience member not related to the matter cannot be a reason that affects delivering narratives to someone. NB: A QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED ABOUT WHERE TO DRAW THE LINE IN PERSONALIZATION REGARDING THIS MATTER. HOW TO DEFINE RELEVANCY? See relevant presentation by Professor Turow, USC Annenberg.

Ethnic origin, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, beliefs, or or other similar personal characteristics not related to the narrative cannot be a reason that affects circulating narratives.

RIGHT OF PRIVACY

Everyone has the right to know when they are tracked. Further, everyone has the right to easily access and edit the information they have provided.

The Curator must clearly express the situation in context if the Curator saves personal information (for example, to support curation algorithms). The audience should always be able to know without an effort if their actions are being followed.

Private information can only be published when an explicit permission to do that is given. This includes also the use of images.

The Curator should not gather data about sickness or death, or gather data about victims of crimes for personalization or other reasons.

The Curator should clearly state why information is gathered (for example, is it to improve automatic curation or to personalize advertisements).

Special care should be taken regarding information that might allow someone to identify a person even though the information is anonymous.

Responsibilities

Previous chapters were about the rights of a citizen regarding automated curation. However, it seems that a chapter regarding responsibilities of the Curator is needed. This chapter will include points regarding

– how to take care of the gathered data (for personalization, data selling, circulation)

– rules for providing data to third parties and how they should be explicitly told to citizens

– how long should data be saved

– etc.

Hat tips to

Journalistin ohjeet (in Finnish)

Books:

Losing the news

New Media, Old News