<http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/ttnr/Blog_standards.pdf>
NEWS BLOGS AND ONLINE COLUMNS In the integrated newsroom, fundamental Times standards of tone, integrity and fairness are the same online as in print. This goes for blogs as much as it does for news articles, but there are subtle differences that this memo is intended to explore. There are many different kinds of blogs on our site. Some of them are indistinguishable from news stories. Some have a personal point of view (see below). Others have a breezy, conversational tone, and resemble some of the lighter articles and personal essays of the print paper's feature sections.
What should be avoided in all of them is any hint of racist, sexist or religious bias, or any suggestion of nasty, snide, sarcastic, or condescending tone — "snark." If something could easily fit in a satirical Web site for young adults, it probably shouldn't go into the news pages of nytimes.com. Our ethics code promises that in all dealings with readers, "civility applies."
Contractions, colloquialisms and even slang are, generally speaking, more allowable in blogs than in print. But obscenity and vulgarity are not, and of course unverified assertions of fact, blind pejorative quotes, and other lapses in journalistic standards don't ever belong in blogs.
Writers and editors of blogs must also distinguish between personal tone and voice and unqualified personal opinion. That is properly found in Opinion blogs, but in the news pages online and in print, opinion must be qualified.
What does "qualified" mean? Take a look at the definition of "News- Page Column," from the Readers' Guide [appearing in full further down] to our content that is posted on the Web site but applies to the printed paper as well:
• News-Page Column: A writer's regularly scheduled essay, offering original insight and perspective on the news. The column often has a distinctive point of view and makes a case for it with reporting. Some blogs resemble news-page or online columns in many respects. They may be written in the first person, for example, and they may have a distinctive point of view.
But the key qualifying phrase here about the "distinctive point of view" or opinion that may be allowable is that the piece "makes a case for it [the point of view] with reporting." Remember, blogs on the news side of NYTimes.com are not the personal, private blogs of the contributors, but blogs of Times employees, whose reputations depend on readers' trust in their impartiality.
So a blog or news column has to give readers the arguments and factual information that led to the writer's conclusion — enough argument and fact on both or all sides of the issue to enable the reader to decide whether to agree or disagree. This is a fundamentally different requirement that does not apply to editorials or Op-Ed columns, which "are not intended to give a balanced look at both sides of a debate," as the Readers' Guide says . As one newsroom editor who has handled a lot of blog copy has noted, "We should encourage smart analysis — indeed, that's what will provide the most value in many blogs, and the basis on which they compete with other blogs and Web sites devoted to the same topics. Deft writing and editing can usually keep analysis from becoming prescription. And as in print, our headlines on analysis should try to capture the debate rather than taking sides in it. (One recent lapse: 'Amazon Plays Dumb in Sales Tax Debate.')"
Moderating reader comments on blogs involves the same Times ethical and journalistic standards that apply to articles. Our moderators' guidelines say they should not edit unacceptable blog comments to make them acceptable; if the comments contain vulgarity, obscenity, offensive personal attacks, say that somebody "sucks," or are incoherent, moderators are advised just to chuck them out. We try to encourage commenters to use their real names, and normally must not pick up reader comments for use in news articles without verifying their identity. On rare occasions, pseudonymous quotations by commenters may be used to indicate the tone of Web reaction to a major news development or situation, but all such quotations are inherently anonymous and therefore subject to the rules governing anonymity in news articles — i.e. no pejorative remarks, no unverifiable assertions of fact or motives, etc.
Questions are bound to arise. They can always be discussed with Web editors, who should consult about tough calls with the News Desk and the Standards Editor.