The Slippery Slope of Citizen Journalism, or Why You Should CYA

In Is this Blog Justice?, Philip Young questions whether the reposting of a photograph of Jackie Danicki's alleged attacker on the London Underground by others is ethical:

"If someone we know were to be attacked we'd all want to do what we could to help. We might think that a reasonably well read weblog offered a useful platform for doing so. But would it be ethical?....

... as the CIPR [see the Chartered Institute of Public Relation's Social Media Guidelines -- Consultation here] thinks about a social media code of conduct which includes issues of competence, I wonder if this incident highlights an important distinction between citizen journalism and its more established equivalent?"

(A quick point: Please read Jackie's disturbing story, as well as the additional information she leaves in the comments on her post. Also note that I'm using the word "alleged" here not to question Jackie veracity, but as a legal term reflecting the status of her claim.)

Perhaps I'm mincing words, but I'm not sure the question is one of ethics as much as asking whether the republishing of the photograph of the individual in question is the right thing to do vs. whether it is legally sound to do.

If this man is the person who actually committed the assault (which is the issue here), then one could argue that finding him and bringing him to justice is a social responsibility, part of which is asking the public to help identify him. One could further argue that republishing his photograph on a private blog is not that different from publishing it through an official law enforcement site, at least conceptually, assuming the original source of the information is reliable. Furthermore, since the attack occurred in a public setting, an argument of invasion of privacy by the assailant could not be as easily made.

However, whether this is a legally sound action is another matter. Should any initially unknown facts or issues arise, anyone who has republished the photograph puts themselves at greater risk than simply having linked to the original post or Jacki's Flickr picture (which, by the way, as of right now has been viewed 2,604 times). And should the assailant make any counterclaims of harm caused him by the publishing or republishing of the photograph (stranger things have happened), then anyone who has participated in this may be on the line as well. 

For what it's worth, I commend Jackie for having handled the attack as she did -- by filing an official report, by publicly sharing her story, and by having the wherewithal to take a photograph of the alleged assailant and posting it on her blog. Hopefully the perpetrator will be caught soon.

Tags: JackieDanicki, Ethics, Assault, CitizenJournalism,

Comments

[Serge Cornelus]

I guess what we are seeing here is the fact that somebody who is confronted personally with a situation like Jackie has been, simply feels the need to get it off her (or his) chest. Before social media, she would have just told it to her friends and relatives. And they would probably do so by telling their friends and so on. Today we do so too, but simply add the medium web to that story. I do not want to go into the question of ethics or legislation here, simply because I am not really sure what the answers might be and because there are some grey areas I do not want to go. But I do understand Jackie's need for sharing this; her doing it on her blog (and hence in public) is her own decision - one I do not feel the need to judge nor condemn.
I do, however, understand Philip's concern with certain aspects of citizen's journalism and especially the dangers it carries. I too often get the feeling public mobbings are not far away simply based on one opinion or view on a weblog, regardless of facts or truth (by which I am definitely not referring to Jackie's story). And he's right in placing question marks there. On the other hand, I am not sure that certain 'established' media are always better: the hunt for alleged paedophiles in the UK based on stories in News of the World to name but one example was not exactly a demonstration of serene reporting either. I do not think the danger lies in the nature of the medium, but - as usual - in the nature of the people who use it...

[Andrea Weckerle]

"I do not think the danger lies in the nature of the medium, but - as usual - in the nature of the people who use it..." Well put, Serge.

[Jackie Danicki]

FWIW, I have struggled with whether or not to post the photo - and, after the fact, whether or not I should have. Today, I consulted many friends on this matter and have come to the conclusion that I did the right thing. I don't want any other women (or man - though I do not think these jerks would raise a hand to a man like they did to me) to suffer what I did. If posting a photo shames them to the point where they would think twice about hitting another woman and/or sexually humiliating another woman, then I have no doubt that I have done the ethical thing. I would love to hear of a scenario where I should feel compelled to protect these people from identification and shame.

[Andrea Weckerle]

Jackie,

I think you handled this all admirably, and the fact that you had the foresight to take a photograph is amazing.

I wasn't only saddened to read about the attack, but also enraged that others didn't immediately come to your aid. Years ago in New York City I was confronted by somone who was making threatening gestures towards me, and I was saved from being mugged only through the quick action of a stranger who intervened. To this day I try to return the favor when I see someone in a similar situation.

I truly hope the person who did this to you is quickly identified and caught.

[makethelogobigger]

Andrea, I don't think it's about ethics, or legalties in this case when it's a personal attack, it's about doing what's right. Especi if she knows who attacked her. I'd publish the photo of anyone who attacked someone I knew. She did the right thing.

Besides, as lawyers like to say, hard to unring that bell. Especially now that the photo is out there for all to see. Besides, the police should look at it like it's helping locate the guy.

America's Most Wanted publishes photos of criminals and gets a huge ratings. How is this any different, you know?

She did the right thing.

[Jim Treacher]

If the police were paying attention, they might have used her photo to identify this creep before he attacked somebody else:

http://www.jackiedanicki.com/?p=961