During this past week a strange event has put Twitter in a new light. Berny Morson, a Rocky Mountain news reporter, took reporting on Twitter to another level. He did not wait for the memorial service to publish the news about the tragic death of a 3-year-old boy. Instead, Morson "twittered" the funeral service this past Wednesday. All across the world bloggers and media outlets have been speaking up about the incident. Was Morson really in the wrong for twittering such an event?
Some are saying Morson took reporting to an all-time low and found his technique to be repulsive. The U.K. newspaper Guardian has stated that Morson is a prime example of its "'Inappropriate Use of Technology' chart." Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism professor Samuel Freedman told ABCnews.com that,
"I think that reporters are often in the uncomfortable position of reporting from settings where people are in great grief. These situations call for the greatest understanding and discretion on the part of the reporter.To be putting real-time notes out there as opposed to waiting until the ceremony is over; there's an element of pillaging a private moment of grief that I'm uncomfortable with."
Freedman also equates the event to "a TV journalist doing a stand-up in the middle of a funeral." Unfortunately, most are finding the technique Morson used to be downright unethical and disrespectful to the the Kudlis family. But was it?
Rabbi David J. Zucker who officiated service disagrees with those in outrage over the event.
"I don't see anything on this [Web site] -- that Berny did -- is in anyway offensive," he said, adding that the coverage was professional and compassionate. "The way I see it is that it's somebody sharing to a wider community [that was] interested and felt connected to this sad event."
To some extent it can be said that there was nothing wrong with Morson's use of Twitter to keep interested sympathizers informed. The updates are still available on the Twitter account RMN_Berny. Upon viewing the updates, you notice that there's absolutely nothing humiliating or disrespectful about what Morson sent to the Twitter account. The updates are short, simple, and do not divulge any unnecessary information about the funeral. The updates served more as service guides than anything else.
If it's Morson's ethics that are in question, I see nothing wrong with the way he reported the event. However, a funeral that is twittered may be a little too much for others to stomach. If it is a question of respect, the parents of Marten haven't said anything about Morson's "tweets". After all, it was their choice to allow him to report the funeral service. What difference does it really make if he chooses to report via Twitter?
This incident also brings up a very touchy topic: privacy. Morson has only helped to blur the line of what's meant to be public and what's meant to be private when it comes to the use of technology. Are we making too much information readily accessible online? Maybe so. However, the choice is always ours to make.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4898
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Much ado about not much. Twitter is a way to share thoughts as they occur. As long as the messages were tasteful and showed respect, what's wrong?
Posted by: Sprague D
|
September 13, 2008 9:30 AM
That's democratization. A few years ago only famous people's funerals were reported in the media. It's just the digital warholization of dying.
Posted by: Benedikt Koehler
|
September 13, 2008 9:34 AM
Benedikt - Since when has death become something to digitize in such a way as Morson has done? (Just playing devils advocate here)
Posted by: Corvida
|
September 13, 2008 9:55 AM
A big hoopla about nothing. Is this no different then what CNN is doing?
Posted by: DieFatty | September 13, 2008 10:39 AM
Had to think about it, but I agree with the Rabbi.
Posted by: Shannon | September 13, 2008 11:00 AM
Aside from the ethics, it really seems to question whether Twitter is a valid media channel.
Is it any different than a live radio broadcast. The journalist's presence should have indicated that the record of events would have been taken to those present.
I wonder if the same questions existed at the nascent stages of Radio?
Posted by: Nate | September 13, 2008 11:47 AM
no problem
Posted by: Gregory Lent
|
September 13, 2008 12:19 PM
I think wanting to grieve in private and having a post-death ritual with lots of people is oxymoronic. I hope that no one bothers with a funeral when I'm dead. What good is hovering and sniffling around my corpse going to do me? Get rid of me, already, and go have a party! Oh, yeah, play some Prince and Weird Al and DO tweet the party!
Posted by: MiniMage
|
September 13, 2008 12:47 PM
I agree that this isn't anything different than television or radio coverage of say, a state funeral. I think maybe the man problem people have is the morbid tone of the tweets. You can report something like that with considerably more elegance than this person did. Why do we watch funerals on television of people like former presidents, or other figures that are part of the national stage, no matter how brief? We do it because we want the perspective of other observers. It helps us digest the event better, and in more successful cases gives us a sense of unity.
I think journalists should be the ones to bring this new type of reporting into the mainstream. There will be a time when a national or global event will be captured in great detail, and hopefully with eloquence with a tool like Twitter. But just like a newspaper article or video coverage, the tone needs to be right. It simply wasn't in this case.
Posted by: Seamus | September 13, 2008 12:52 PM
In the second to last paragraph, where you said "it was there choice", you should have said "their".
Posted by: grammarnazi | September 13, 2008 2:43 PM
Tsk. They should have gone to Jews Against Circumcision (JAC) dot-org. Such mutilation is *not* necessary.
This is a sick minute to minute account of the funeral as told by the Twitter.
http://twitter.com/RMN_Berny
The unethical sexual assault of boys NEEDS to stop!
http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/
Posted by: macshill (chris mccaw) | September 13, 2008 4:46 PM
What I don't understand is how a professor of journalism cannot separate the use of twitter from a reporting standing up in the middle of the funeral.
Clearly this reporter did not do anything that would disrupt the funeral. Nor did he say anything disrespectful. He sent out news to people in a proper and discrete way, using tools of the current age, IMO.
I don't know how long it will take for traditional media to catch up, but I am waiting patiently. The reporter specifically picked a method to use that would not bother the funeral itself and people are outraged?
Bleh I say!
Posted by: fershur | September 13, 2008 8:59 PM
if the funeral was for anyone but a 3 year old kid would this be news?? in short .... No
Posted by: j | September 14, 2008 1:20 AM
Recently while traveling my wife attended the memorial service of a dear friend and held her cell phone near a speaker in the hall - thousands of miles away my dinner host allowed me a private room in which I "attended" the service, albeit electronically. If the presiding Rabbi saw nothing wrong (see article above) then who are the self-righteous folks who are objecting so loudly? Shut up and mind your own business. Look in your mirrors first. Many people assuage their own guilt by looking SO hard to find fault in others.
Posted by: Gerry Riskin | September 14, 2008 10:45 AM
I feel that the reporter should have at least waited for the ceremony to end and the mourners to leave before posting his report.
Funerals, bereavement, death are surely humanity's most private moment. Tragedy needs respect.
Posted by: John Larkin | September 15, 2008 2:24 AM
This is kind of a tough one. I think I end up on the side of thinking this was a little bit wrong. While probably several folks at the funeral knew there would be press, the right thing for him to be doing while he was there was being fully present, not texting away. Hopefully he was sitting or standing in the back so family didn't see him and wonder if he was checking his email.
Posted by: Jenny Reiswig | September 15, 2008 11:45 AM