The ethics of technology columnists

Jeremy Wagstaff   |  Mon, 10/19/2009 1:24 PM  |  Sci-Tech

The New York Times' public editor Clark Hoyt, a kind of ombudsman, recently wrote about the ethics of David Pogue, the Times' technology columnist.

It's a delicate subject, and one I'd like to take a look at.

Hoyt dissects Pogue's various interests - he appears on TV, he lectures, he gives talks on cruises, he writes manuals - and concludes that "his multiple interests and loyalties raise interesting ethical issues in this new age when individual journalists can become brands of their own, stars who seem to transcend the old rules that sharply limited outside activity and demanded an overriding obligation to the Times and its readers."

In other words, we journalists had to comply with strict conflict of interest rules when we worked for outfits like the Times, but some of us become bigger than that, so we're our own brand, with our own rules.

Like writing a manual for a piece of software that you're also reviewing, say.

Eventually, Hoyt consults three outsiders, all of whom conclude that Pogue has a conflict of interest, because he's saying nice things about Apple's upgrade to its operating system, while also selling manuals for it.

The NYT's decision: to include a disclosure page on his website.

Now, I like Pogue a lot. I think he really knows what he's talking about, and he's funny.

Not my kind of funny, always, but funnier than Walt Mossberg, the Wall Street Journal's tech columnist.

But I'm not sure this solves the problem.

I should point out here that I wrote for the Journal for a few years, doing exactly that: being a technology columnist.

So on one hand I know what I'm talking about. On the other, I'm all sour grapes.

But my feeling is this: Most readers don't understand the hoops good journalists try to jump through - and are supposed to jump through - to avoid any conflict of interest.

Let alone any appearance of conflict of interest.

The good ones basically take a vow of poverty so they don't get tempted to invest money in things that they might have heard about at work.

When it comes to technology, it's particularly tricky, because it's all about gadgets.

A columnist writes about the iPhone, and if they say something good about it, the reader may go out and buy it.

So should the columnist allow Apple, or the carrier, to lend them the iPhone to review it?

Should they buy the iPhone, anonymously, as a good food reviewer would visit a restaurant incognito?

The truth is that many journalists wouldn't do that.

I've heard lots of horror stories about technology journalists who won't write a thing unless they're guaranteed they can keep the gizmo they're reviewing.

And get a junket to another continent, along with spending money and time for shopping, thrown into the bargain.

I'm probably more shocked by this kind of thing than most readers.

But I do know a lot of technology columnists who are very careful about how they review stuff, and they try to be really careful about what they say: After all, if one person buys a gadget based on their review, they may feel some responsibility for the expense.

Blogs have made this harder. Most bloggers don't have the same journalistic upbringing - where objectivity and impartiality, and freedom from grubby deals, are part of one's apprenticeship - and so will write their own rules.

The result is that journalists are increasingly appraised like bloggers: The brand that carries them is their own, not the outlet they write for.

Which brings us back to Pogue. In my view there's no question that he's an honest reviewer of the products he reviews.

His word is his brand.

But the problem isn't that. It's that there are people out there who may not believe him.

Because of the manuals. Because of the blurred blogosphere, and the fact that there are lots of journalists and publications out there that flout the unwritten rules so much that PR companies have special departments to cater to their needs.

So for Pogue the thing is that while his many fans know he calls it as he sees it, and that he is by no means the epitome of the problem, there's no question there is a problem.

Not so much with him, but with the industry.

The danger is that he becomes a lightning rod, and the bigger storm - over where advertising starts and genuine journalism stops - wanders away.

What I'd love to see is a code of ethics among technology writers - indeed anyone writing about products - so we all know what the standard is.

For now, I just try to recommend stuff in this column that's free. That way, no one loses money if they try it, and I don't feel bad for recommending it.

c 2009 Loose Wire Pte Ltd

This story cannot be reproduced without written permission from the writer. Jeremy Wagstaff is a commentator on technology and appears regularly on the BBC World Service. You can reach him via email at jeremy@loosewire.org

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.