Can the traditional death knock ever work in face of the social media onslaught?
Relatives of the missing and the dead after the Manchester bomb are being besieged by journalists. Should we all digital to turn us into persecutors of the innocent?
With a group associated with WikiLeaks threatening to compile databases of verified users and their families - is verification really serving its goal?
Creating an accidental video means you're going to be deluged by requests to use it - and possibly by an ethical dilemma.
How should journalists use Reddit - and when? Three experts give their advice on making the most of the site.
Tired? Over-worked? Afraid of making unethical decisions? Step away from the mobile phone voicemail and have a nice cup of coffee.
As one writer discovered - Mumsnet expects free content, or even for you to pay them to publish you...
Tonight's Panorama on Jimmy Saville and the BBC has made a horrifying situation desperately clear.
Why MG Siegler is right to complain about the WSJ not linking to him - and why you win through linking.
Image via Wikipedia
Comprehensive account by Tom Morris of how Wikipedia volunteers deal with people who abuse the site, including Mr Hari:
David r was banned in July. Banning is a social measure where the community decides that the person’s invitation to edit the site has been rescinded. You can read David r/Hari’s ban discussion: there were fifteen users who supported a ban (myself included), and three who opposed the ban. David r is banned indefinitely from editing anything on Wikipedia. As we now have confirmation that David r is Johann Hari, Johann Hari is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This means that if he pops up with a new account and someone can confirm that the account is a “sockpuppet” used by Hari, that account will be blocked indefinitely on sight.
Who does all this? Volunteers.
Interesting contrast to The Independent‘s decision.