Transparency is the word that ran through the presentation the New England Newspaper Association gave Thursday at its two-day virtual convention.
The convention is a combination of workshops and recognition of member newspapers — including The Item — for significant achievements.
Natalia Stroud, director of the Center of Media Engagement at the Moody College of Communications, University of Texas at Austin, moderated an online discussion of different ways newspapers can be more trustworthy to their publications and their websites. And in every way possible, Stroud emphasized transparency.
The suggestions came out of the Trust Project, which met and came up with some criteria on what newspapers and news websites should do that would indicate that they’re trustworthy.
Stroud mentioned several. First, she said, stories should be clearly labeled if they’re opinion pieces, explainers, or any other kind of commentary. She said not everyone who reads a print edition or a website understands the difference if stories aren’t completely labeled. She also recommended footnotes that might explain sources, a description of why the story was reported in the first place, and — if applicable — whether the paper has participated in the Trust Project.
Also important, she said, are reporter biographies with pictures.
Stroud said that doing just one or two of these recommendations won’t change a reader’s perception of trustworthiness.
“It takes bold action to move that needle,” she said. “A small change won’t do it.”
She also cited some common concerns of readers.
“Dig deeper,” she said. “Our studies have shown that some stories can seem unfinished or superficial.”
Also important, she said, was to explain terminology specific to certain professions, such as legal, educational or technical.
“Translate jargon,” she said. “And explain it in detail.”
Readers also wonder sometimes why some sources are used and not others.
“We should explain our source choices,” she said, adding the “people want newspapers to guard against biases.”
She said that when using search engines such as Google to look up information, reporters should be as sure as they can be that the source they’re using is credible and reliable. And while Wikipedia is not considered a valid source in some instances, it usually will provide a one- or two-paragraph summary of whatever sources have been consulted, Stroud said.
