Al di là dell’articolo in sé, però, è interessante piuttosto riportare l’indicazione di Raju Narisetti inviata in data 15 ottobre a tutte le newsroom del quotidiano della capitale, nella quale il managing editor del giornale esclude la possibilità di interloquire con i lettori tramite i social media (“it shouldn’t have been sent“, precisa Narisetti a proposito dello scambio di tweet tra lo staff e l’associazione GLAAD, la Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, che aveva protestato per il tono del pezzo di Perkins) ribadendo invece che l’account ufficiale dovrebbe servire solamente per la diffusione delle news più rilevanti della testata, e non per confrontarsi con i lettori sui criteri di pubblicazione degli articoli o per rispondere a loro eventuali critiche specifiche.
Even as we encourage everyone in the newsroom to embrace social media and relevant tools, it is absolutely vital to remember that the purpose of these Post branded accounts is to use them as a platform to promote news, bring in user generated content and increase audience engagement with Post content. No branded Post accounts should be used to answer critics and speak on behalf of the Post, just as you should follow our normal journalistic guidelines in not using your personal social media accounts to speak on behalf of the Post.
Perhaps it would be useful to think of the issue this way: when we write a story, our readers are free to respond and we provide them a venue to do so. We sometimes engage them in a private verbal conversation, but once we enter a debate personally through social media, this would be equivalent to allowing a reader to write a letter to the editor–and then publishing a rebuttal by the reporter. It’s something we don’t do.