While covering recent COVID-19 numbers in their community, the News Tribune posted that the local health department “caved” in releasing numbers related to coronavirus spread. When one of the commenters pointed out that the language sounded biased, editor Gary Castor took the time to respond on Facebook, publically acknowledging it might not have been the best wording: “You are absolutely correct; it was a poor choice of words. I did not see the post before it was sent to Facebook, but after seeing it in my feed, I asked that the verb be changed. The story has since been changed to say the department relented to the repeated requests of the city.”
After incorrect information was spreading in the community about how city officials were allegedly hiding Coronavirus numbers from the public, the Tennessean wrote a fact check countering the misinformation. The story addressed the misinformation and explained where the confusion was. By correcting the record the newsroom was able to demonstrate to their readers that they care about getting things right.
FiveThirtyEight included a disclaimer alongside an election poll they ran to clarity that while polls can be helpful benchmark ahead of the election, it can’t possibly predict the outcome of any election. “Before we proceed further, one disclaimer about the scope of the model: It seeks to reflect the vote as cast on Election Day, assuming that there are reasonable efforts to allow eligible citizens to vote and to count all legal ballots, and that electors are awarded to the popular-vote winner in each state. It does not account for the possibility of extraconstitutional shenanigans by Trump or by anyone else, such as trying to prevent mail ballots from being counted,” the disclaimer read.
PEN America wrote a guide for how to talk to friends and family who share misinformation, including how to verify information and avoid escalation on social media. “While some people create and spread disinformation—false information shared with the intent to deceive others—your friends and family may well spread misinformation, which is shared by people who may not know the information is false. They probably think the content is true, and they may feel they’re sharing something important. That can make it tough to know how to confront them. Here are a few suggestions.” This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Green Bay Press Gazette wrote a story detailing it’s “Letters to the Editor” process ahead of the 2020 Election. In the guidelines, the newsroom states it’s purpose with publishing political letters earlier in the year than they normally would: “We will publish letters to the editor related to local, state and national campaigns. With many citizens voting early, we want the conversation to begin sooner than normal.” This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Colorado Sun wrote a columnn about their newsroom’s approach to the 2020 elections, which included how they work to be fair, why they are trustworthy and how they decide what election news to cover — and not cover. “Our mission is to inform more than infuriate by telling stories that hold elected officials accountable and help readers better understand what’s happening within the state’s democratic institutions and political arena,” the column reads. “This particularly applies to our 2020 election coverage.” This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
How do you decide what to cover? How do you work to be fair? What sources do you trust? When it comes to elections coverage, the kind of transparency we advocate for is especially important. You’re working (really hard, we imagine) to provide a public service and contribute to a healthy democracy, and your audience should know that. Take some inspiration from this FAQ that Colorado Public Radio put together about election coverage. We’ll share some highlights here, but the whole thing is recommended reading. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
Many of you probably get accused of having a liberal bias — of publishing more “negative” content about conservative politicians and of reporting more favorably on progressive ideas and candidates. I’m guessing you probably want your audience to know you work hard to be fair. And I am guessing you stand behind your coverage. If so, where’s your evidence? Remember, it’s reasonable for news consumers to be frustrated by partisan information, overwhelmed with choices and confused about what news to trust. It’s laudable for them to ask you to provide evidence of your credibility. Their skepticism and caution are appropriate. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
How do you describe conspiracy theories like QAnon to your audience? How about candidates for office who amplify or adhere to those theories? This is tricky territory for journalists. As the American Press Institute’s Susan Benkelman wrote last week: If you are in the business of trying to publish what’s true, how do you treat things that are untrue without amplifying them? When is the right time to write about them and what is the right way to describe them accurately? How do you decide which ones are not worth debunking and which are? In an age of social media, how do you do all this without inadvertently encouraging the spread of falsehoods? Benkelman’s piece is full of concrete advice and example language to use when making coverage decisions about dangerous, false messages. (As a reminder, Trusting News is a project of both API and the Reynolds Journalism Institute.) The piece also links to a running list of congressional candidates who have embraced QAnon’s messaging, sorted by state. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
After receiving complaints and feedback that they were biased in their coverage, the Coloradoan’s content strategies Jennifer Hefty wrote a column explaining that yes, they were biased, but biased toward facts, public safety, and toward bettering the community. “In short, yes we have biases: Not of the political nature, but toward public safety and facts,” Hefty wrote in a Facebook post. Hefty’s column also went on to address questions and feedback about the newsroom’s coronavirus coverage, shedding light on their reporting process and the newsroom’s continued mission of fairness and accuracy. “Our newsroom has changed — from our physical location to how we stagger shifts to provide more coverage while working with reduced staffing. Our stories have changed — we shifted away from long-term plans to better cover the rapidly-developing pandemic,” Hefty wrote. “Two things that have not changed: Our ethical principles and our commitment to transparency with you, our readers.”
After facing accusations that a photojournalist altered a photo that showed a crowded bridge in Florida after the SpaceX launch during the coronavirus pandemic, Florida Today wrote a column explaining it wasn’t a fake or old image. In the column they gave details as to how the photographer captured the image, even mentioning that the kind of camera and lense used wouldn’t have compressed the image. “As journalists, we’re big believers in asking questions and seeking to verify information,” editor Mara Bellaby wrote. “But it’s one thing to inquire and quite another to declare ‘Fake News’ and ignore all evidence to the contrary. Evidence like people wearing masks in the photo, other cell phone images shared that showed a similar scene and, finally, common sense.”
In the midst of covering protests in Cincinnati, WCPO director Mike Canan wrote a column reminding their users of their journalist’s dedication to providing fair coverage for their community by discussing how they were putting themselves in the middle of it all — risking danger from protests and the police while also facing the danger of contracting COVID. “At the same time, the middle is where we have to be. We need to be out there reporting,” Canan wrote. “But we also need to be showing both sides. We need to accurately and fairly reflect what is happening in our community.”
KPRC in Houston created a form where their audience could reach out and ask reporters to fact-check suspicious claims seen on social media. The station also set expectations for when users should expect a response when asking for feedback: “Due to volume, we can’t respond to everyone, but we use all shared information to track trends and find the best places to intercede with reporting and stories.”
While reporting on a controversial police killing of an unarmed black man, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution included a note explaining their approach to covering the story: “Given the intense public interest in the shooting death of Rayshard Brooks by Atlanta police officer Garrett Rolfe and how this incident may factor into policy changes and decisions on policing, the AJC has committed to providing the fullest, most complete coverage possible. That includes looking at the actions and backgrounds of both Rolfe and Brooks and how those may have shaped their encounter on Friday night … We will publish more information as soon as we can evaluate what is accurate and relevant, and give the material context, as is our usual practice.”
Station News Channel 5 showed incredible transparency by publically admitting when they showed bias in two similar Facebook posts. The discrepancy came while reporting on arrests of people who were charged with causing damage to the local courthouse: both men were felons, but in a Facebook post, the station referred to the white man by his name, whereas the station referred to the black as a convicted felon. When readers called out the station for what they perceived as implicit bias, instead of ignoring it, the station acknowledged the problem, changed the posts, restated diversity efforts and committed to doing better in the future.
Station WEWS in Cleveland wrote a story directly addressing that misinformation was being spread on social media around how deaths related to COVID-19 were being reported. In the article, the newsroom tried to set the record straight by breaking down how reporters got information from the CDC and explaining how the county was tracking coronavirus cases and deaths. The station also reminded the public that neither health officials nor the media were trying to manipulate case numbers: “Despite what you may read in comments sections and on some questionably-sourced websites, health agencies are not conspiring to over-report or under-report COVID-19 deaths; their goal is to accurately report the disease’s impact on our communities.” This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
ProPublica sent out a newsletter to the people who have supported them financially that talked directly about political bias in news. The organization’s president Richard Tofel, who penned the newsletter, shared that yes, the newsroom has written more stories critical of President Trump than President Obama, and went on to explain in detail why that’s the case. Tofel also was very transparent about what ProPublica’s audience looked like (that it tends to be more liberal) and why they wish they had more conservative and non-white readers. “ProPublica would be more effective if our readership contained a proportion of people of color closer to the population of the country, and if it contained a similar proportion of self-identified conservatives,” Tofel wrote. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
Most of us have probably been told that we are one-sided in our coverage. It’s a common complaint, and it can be a tough one to reply to. Especially when it comes to political coverage, we try hard to be fair. Yet those efforts often go unnoticed. The interesting thing is that when we consider what balanced coverage looks like, we are often thinking about it over time. We think about how we interviewed the family of the victim shot last week. So, if we talk to gun rights activists today, we do not necessarily need to hear from gun violence victims again in the same story. But, for the user, who most likely did not see the story from last week, but did see today’s, they may think we are siding with the gun rights activists because they are not hearing from all sides in one story. Despite the steps we take to produce responsible, ethical journalism every day, we’re often not getting credit for those efforts. We don’t draw enough ties between our entire body of coverage. We don’t point out the consistency in our approach, the thoughtfulness behind our decisions or the pains we take to represent multiple sides of an issue fairly. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here. 
At the beginning of Georgia’s Legislative session, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution wrote an article explaining how they were planning on covering the legislature. In the story, they clearly state why it’s important to dedicate so many newsroom resources to the coverage, and also explained why they would be focusing more Republican initiatives. “Both chambers of the Legislature are controlled by Republicans, and the governor and other statewide leaders are also Republicans. That means that issues and bills they push have a far greater chance of becoming law,” the article reads. “As a result, we typically write more stories examining and vetting Republican initiatives than we do bills sponsored by Democrats if they have little chance of passing. When Democrats controlled the Legislature before 2003, the reverse was true.”
It’s not uncommon for the public to not understand how or why newspapers make political endorsements. The editorial board at the Tennessean tried to explain this by sharing a bit about its fact-gathering and decision-making process in an endorsement supporting a city-wide transportation plan. “After weighing multiple arguments, sponsoring a debate, reading the 55-page plan, holding eight meetings with diverse stakeholders and attending multiple forums, The Tennessean Editorial Board recommends that Metro Nashville voters approve the plan,” the article read.
At the beginning of Georgia’s Legislative session, the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote an article explaining how they were planning on covering the legislature. In the story, they clearly state why it’s important to dedicate so many newsroom resources to the coverage, and also explained why they would be focusing more Republican initiatives. “Both chambers of the Legislature are controlled by Republicans, and the governor and other statewide leaders are also Republicans. That means that issues and bills they push have a far greater chance of becoming law,” the article reads. “As a result, we typically write more stories examining and vetting Republican initiatives than we do bills sponsored by Democrats if they have little chance of passing. When Democrats controlled the Legislature before 2003, the reverse was true.”
While reporting on the House impeachment vote again President Trump, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution included a box on the front page of its print paper that clearly stated how they were striving to provide fair coverage. “To ensure our impeachment coverage continues to be balanced, we used the same format on the front page and on A7 for the Senate vote as we did the House vote on Dec. 18,” the box read.
While other news sources were reporting the names of those who were violating Cincinnati’s stay-at-home violations, WPCO Senior Director Mike Canan took the opportunity to differentiate his newsroom’s approach from the competition. Instead of publishing specific names, Canan said he “challenged our team to do more. I wanted context on how law enforcement was making these decisions and what the data was showing. Ultimately, one person’s name is less important to the community as the pattern of behavior,” Canan wrote. “What we found is that mostly the people involved committed other crimes and police simply tacked the stay-at-home violation on.” Canan shared this information in a series of tweets while linking to the story.
The Spokesman-Review took two full pages in the print paper to help give readers a better understanding of how news works. The first, “Newspapers 101,” explained the difference between a newspaper story, an editorial and a column, and how they appear differently in the Review’s daily paper. The second is a brief history of “fake news” and gave readers some basic tools for determining the credibility of news reports. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
Newsrooms hear a lot of accusations that they use photos and videos to misrepresent or even manipulate reality. We’ve heard from journalists lately wondering whether it’s best to ignore or respond to accusations of “fake news” and photo or video manipulation. We’ve also seen confusion and misassumptions in our own social networks and in comments on news stories when it comes to telling what’s real. Here’s what we at Trusting News want newsrooms to remember in those situations: It’s fair for news consumers to be skeptical. They shouldn’t automatically believe what they see, and it’s genuinely tricky to know which news brands are trustworthy. (Some aren’t.) No one but you is going to explain what makes your own work credible. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
In a story explaining the paper’s endorsements for an upcoming election, the San Fransisco Chronicle included a box that clearly explained what the editorial board was and how the endorsement process worked. “These endorsements are made by the editorial board, which consists of the opinion pages’ writers and editors, after researching the issues and interviewing the candidates,” the box read. The paper also included a link to a column explaining how and why the newspaper makes endorsements.
In a story about presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar, the San Fransisco Chroncicle inserted language in the story to tell readers how and why they were covering Democratic presidential candidates, and how the paper was striving to provide equal coverage. “The Chronicle is examining how California would look if the major Democratic presidential candidates were elected and could implement their top policy priorities,” the box read. “Candidates’ positions are taken from their websites, their campaign comments, and in some cases legislation they have sponsored in office.”
In breaking news situations, we all know that the information we are reporting is the most accurate and best information we have at that moment. But, have we helped our audience navigate fast-changing information? At Trusting News, we have shared with you how some newsrooms try to make this point clear in their reporting. While covering COVID-19, probably the biggest breaking news story of our time, we should all be working to make sure our users are alerted to this fact. We should also be working to help them understand why this is the case. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
After facing accusations that a photojournalist altered a photo that showed a closed beach packed with people during the coronavirus pandemic, the Caller-Times wrote a column exculpating the photo. “We often face criticism and recognize people are entitled to opinions about what and how we cover the news. It comes with the territory. It also doesn’t change the facts. That’s why we typically let it roll on by and focus on what’s important: informing our community,” editor Mary Ann Cavazos Beckett wrote. “But when several people continued to spread false information about how and when the beach photo was taken it became concerning.” Beckett also explained and linked to the paper’s ethics policy and mission statement, reminding their audience of the paper’s commitment to accuracy and the community.
WTXL decided to stop publishing mugshots in the majority of its crime stories. The station’s general manager Matt Brown wrote in a column explaining that the decision was out of a commitment to “tell stories that go beyond the irrelevant and isolated stories on the crime beat, and instead focus on stories that give you a true sense of your community through context, perspective and impact. We will still cover significant and impactful crimes in your community. We will still publish stories with mugshots of persons wanted or arrested for noteworthy or impactful crimes in your community.” Brown ended the column by stating he hoped the change would be a positive one for the community and offered a place for users to offer their feedback about the decision. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Toronto Star updated how it displayed its opinion content in order to help readers distinguish opinion stories from news. The changes included clearer labels as well as a glossary that defined the different types of analysis and columns their audience would see in their editorial pages. “We are trying to help be a place that can help cut through the confusion and inaccuracies,” Star editor Irene Gentle wrote. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do. 
NPR changed it’s online design in its opinion section so that it was easier for users to spot what was news content and what was opinion content. The changes included using more straightforward language to describe the different kinds of opinion content and placing the author’s credentials in a more prominent position. “NPR does not have a separate place for opinion pieces (unlike newspapers, say, which segregate such content on the editorial pages), so it’s particularly important that such content is obvious to readers when it appears on the NPR home page or on a mobile app or in a social media feed,” a column explaining the change read. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Philadelphia Inquirer redesigned its opinion pages in the paper so that it was easier for their audience to read and understand the difference between news and opinion content. The changes included a glossary that explained the difference between editorials, op-eds and columns, as well as updated labels that helped clarify for readers which stories were news, and which ones were opinion. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Herald and Review used a Twitter thread to highlight some of their best journalism, showing their audience the variety and depth of their journalism. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Globe and Mail published a Google Form on its website where readers could share feedback if they thought the paper got something wrong. By doing this, the newsroom showed they were open to reader feedback and striving for fairness and accuracy. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
Several things are true at this strange moment. Our lives feel upside down. People are worried about their health and have a heightened desire to stay informed. The economy is in turmoil. Journalists are stressed and pressed for time (or furloughed or laid off). The financial part of the news business is in a weakened state just when people need journalism most. All of this happening in an information landscape that is complicated and full of pitfalls for both news consumers and journalists. People are skeptical of journalism — sometimes for fair reasons and sometimes based on misassumptions and ignorance about how journalism operates. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
In a story highlighting “fake news” about animals amid the coronavirus outbreak, National Geographic included an editor’s note that alerted readers to online tools they could use to help verify if photos are real or have been altered. “If a post seems too good to be true, check social media to see if anyone else has already debunked it,” the note read. By telling readers how to spot altered photos, they are establishing that they don’t support “fake” news and are actively trying to quell misinformation. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
We all know how much information is out there right now because a lot of you are working around the clock to produce it. COVID-19 is a breaking news story that has continued and will continue for weeks and months. But just as you are working to produce credible stories that can help save lives, there are other people sharing links that are totally false or contain misinformation. You may think, what does the misinformation have to do with me and my journalism? What should you do about it? Well, you could ignore it (though at Trusting News we don’t recommend that and explain why here). But what if the misinformation is being shared in a Facebook group you manage, underneath a link you posted on social media or on comments on your news story? More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
WMAR-2 News in Baltimore wrote a story explaining how their programming would change to keep their newsroom and journalists safe during the COVID-19 outbreak. The station ended the column by asking for questions and news tips from the audience, saying: “We can’t do this without you. Please tell us what is going on in your community.” This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
Man, there are a lot of coronavirus updates flying around these days. There’s so much to know and understand, and there’s sure not a shortage of news stories. But we know that access to more stories doesn’t always make people feel more informed. Often, it’s the opposite. You might be in a newsroom that sees its mission as sharing every new fact and every new angle in real time. Perhaps that’s why people turn to you in the first place. But for some of you — especially in local news — it’s worth stepping back and thinking about what role you play. In a crowded news ecosystem full of constant, repetitive, overwhelming updates, what do you offer? Some newsrooms are having conversations about focusing on the larger context, and on information that helps people make decisions about their own lives. If you’re in one of them, congratulations! It sounds like the mission of your coverage is clear. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
Ask any opinion journalist this question: Do you get complaints from your audience that your work is biased? In our experience, the answer is almost certainly going to be yes. Accusations of bias are so ubiquitous that it’s no longer widely understood that some journalism is actually designed to persuade. See this comment, from a user survey one of our newsroom partners conducted: “Change the restaurant reviewer; she’s very biased.” You mean you noticed that the person hired to tell you what she thinks of restaurants is sharing her opinion? It’s easy to be frustrated by that misunderstanding, and it’s tempting to roll our eyes and move on with our day. But think about the fact that a significant subset of readers think opinions are accidentally creeping into your news coverage, rather than understanding that you’re paying journalists to share their opinion. The report highlights the experiences and advice of editors like Joel Christopher. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here
It’s a new year; hello 2020. For a lot of us, a new year brings promises of setting goals both personally and professionally. As you do this, I have one for you to consider: Talk honestly to your audience about the idea of “fake news.” While we would all probably just wish the phrase would go away in this new year, a look through comments on social media shows complaints about bias and media manipulation aren’t going anywhere. So, instead of side-stepping them or ignoring them, let’s address them directly. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
When faced with a big story, journalists know how to mobilize. We quickly identify angles, send staffers to key locations and set up a system for producing and editing content back in the newsroom. Do most news consumers understand what a commitment of resources that is? Of course not — any more than most of us understand everything that happens at an MLB ballpark on opening day, behind the scenes at a church on Christmas Eve or with a construction crew building a housing development. Unless you’ve been through it, you just can’t picture it. What if offering a window into the complexity of your work could help lend credibility and inspire an appreciation for the efforts? More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
It’s important to label content so your audience understands when they’re reading an opinion story versus a news story. The editorial board at the Corpus Christi (Texas) Caller-Times did this by clearly labeling one of its editorials with the word “opinion.” The board also posted an explainer at the top of the editorial on how opinion content is different from traditional news coverage. “The conclusions and opinions here have been derived by our Editorial Board and are not associated with the news staff,” the board wrote.
At Trusting News we’ve talked a lot about how important labeling opinion content is. We hope you agree with us, and we’ll keep talking about it. But truly transparent practices around opinion pieces need to go further than labeling. What if you told your audience whose opinion is being shared? Or why this person’s opinion is being shared? More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here
Journalists often face tough decisions when it comes to whether and how to publish disturbing images. They carefully weigh their responsibility to accurately and compellingly reflect a harsh reality while also avoiding exploitation and respecting the preferences and privacy of both their audience members and the subjects of the images. As Kelly McBride wrote for Poynter last week, it’s not up to newsrooms to shield their communities from hard truths, but they can minimize harm by treating the situation carefully. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here
I have talked to a lot of editors and news directors who want to avoid using the term “fake news” at all costs, and their reasons resonate with me. Some say they don’t want to perpetuate or validate the use of the term by using it. Sometimes they don’t want to bring it up only to have the conversation get taken over by trolls. And in some cases, they just dread the term because they don’t know how to respond to the accusations that come with it. More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here
Breaking news is a term that elicits varied feelings for journalists. It seems to always be a hectic time, with people and information moving at lightning speeds. It’s also when news organizations have an opportunity to fulfill one of their top duties: providing accurate information to the public. While a lot of us thrive and feel an adrenaline rush during breaking news situations, it’s also a time when most mistakes happen. And our audiences notice. To read more from this edition click here and you can sign up for the weekly “Trust Tips” newsletter by clicking here.
Ask news consumers what they’re looking for in responsible journalism, and at the very top of the list will be one word: balance. (At least, it’s at the top of the list from 81 user interviews conducted by Trusting News partners. Often mentioned alongside the word balance are the words “both sides.” These are tricky concepts, of course. There are usually more than two sides. And the primary goal of journalism is not to produce a scale with two equal sides. Too often, balance is equated with equal air time or column inches, and that’s not the business we’re in. To read more from this edition click here and you can sign up for the weekly “Trust Tips” newsletter by clicking here.
One way to combat the fake news culture is to report on it. When new research explained how false information spreads and why people share it, the Christian Science Monitor drew attention to that research. It can be empowering and effective to use the words fake news while redefining them.
If a commenter complains about fake news, consider addressing the issue head-on. That is what WCPO did in their Facebook comments. They explained what fake news really is and why it doesn’t apply to their work. Invite reports of actual inaccuracies.
Facebook comments can be an effective way to say directly to your community that you value their trust, then invite and answer questions. WCPO editors did just that. In the comments that followed, some commenters complained in general about bias in the media and fake news. An editor replied by inviting specific examples from their coverage. Not only that, he included his own email address. That shows that the station is open to feedback, but it also keeps the conversation focused on their own coverage, not the media overall.
ENID used Facebook to introduce two new columnists. They highlighted their differences in the post by saying, “both have differing opinions on a wide range of topics in news today and share them weekly, Dave on Wednesday and James on Friday.”
The Jefferson City News Tribune demonstrated balance while covering the anniversary of President Donald Trump’s inauguration, which was marked with protests and support. Here is what their front page looked like on Jan. 21, a day protestors and supporters alike took the streets to express themselves. They emphasized the intent behind the approach when sharing the front page on Facebook.

The Jefferson City News Tribune used an editor’s note at the top of stories to show balance. The note said, “The Jefferson City community has been facing the complex topics of diversity and racism for several months, and we’ve been reporting on those discussions as they happen. Today’s story focuses on the efforts of local faith leaders to identify goals and action steps to heal racial issues they see in the community. We’ve also heard from city leaders, school district officials, teachers, concerned parents and Jefferson City Public Schools alumni. For a look at all of the voices who have contributed to this discussion, view additional coverage at newstribune.com/diversity.”
USA TODAY used Facebook LIVE to bring two of their opinion editors with opposing views together to debate the president’s State of the Union speech. The also asked their users to ask questions during the live broadcast.
KCRG decided to explain to users how it was going to cover President Donald Trump's use of profanity to describe some third-world countries.
KCRG decided to explain to users how it was going to cover President Donald Trump’s use of profanity to describe some third-world countries. In the opinion piece, a news manager explains how they are going to cover the story differently than other media organizations, by focusing on the “why” and not the reactionary soundbites. This post allowed the newsroom to explain its news values and set itself apart from “the media,” a group that when lumped together can often be criticized and distrusted. KCRG also shared the post on Facebook and asked for feedback on how they chose to cover the story.
KCRG decided to explain to users how it was going to cover President Donald Trump's use of profanity to describe some third-world countries.
KCRG decided to explain to users how it was going to cover President Donald Trump’s use of profanity to describe some third-world countries. In the opinion piece, a news manager explains how they are going to cover the story differently than other media organizations, by focusing on the “why” and not the reactionary soundbites. This post allowed the newsroom to explain its news values and set itself apart from “the media,” a group that when lumped together can often be criticized and distrusted. KCRG also shared the post on Facebook and asked for feedback on how they chose to cover the story.
Video: How to Submit a Letter to the Editor
The Tennessean produced a 41-second video  for users explaining how to submit a “letter to the editor.” They included information about where to send the letter and how many words it should be (250 or less). The video is concise and to the point. More importantly, it can be embedded on the website or easily shared on social and by including text on the screen, it is easily consumable.
Video: How to Submit a Letter to the Editor
The Tennessean produced a 41-second video  for users explaining how to submit a “letter to the editor.” They included information about where to send the letter and how many words it should be (250 or less). The video is concise and to the point. More importantly, it can be embedded on the website or easily shared on social and by including text on the screen, it is easily consumable.
Enid used Facebook to remind their users of what type of content they will delete and what type they allow in comment sections. Having a comment policy for your website and social platforms allows you to more easily moderate conversations with users. But, while you may have established these policies and have them visibly displayed, a reminder is always helpful.
Enid used Facebook to remind their users of what type of content they will delete and what type they allow in comment sections. Having a comment policy for your website and social platforms allows you to more easily moderate conversations with users. But, while you may have established these policies and have them visibly displayed, a reminder is always helpful.
Community Impact wanted to make sure its users understood how it was approaching primary election season. In a post on their website, they stressed how they will be reaching out to all candidates in contested races and would not be endorsing candidates. They also shared which races they would be covering. This post did not inspire negative comments from users, something that is rare for a political story.
Community Impact wanted to make sure its users understood how it was approaching primary election season. In a post on their website, they stressed how they will be reaching out to all candidates in contested races and would not be endorsing candidates. They also shared which races they would be covering. This post did not inspire negative comments from users, something that is rare for a political story.
The Gazette designed a button for their web stories that asked users if the information about how they reported a story was "helpful" or "not helpful." Users weighed in on that questions by simply clicking on the words. This was added to pull-out boxes and at the end of written stories.
The Gazette designed a button for their web stories that asked users if the information about how they reported a story was “helpful” or “not helpful.” Users weighed in on that questions by simply clicking on the words. This was added to pull-out boxes and at the end of written stories.
In print, multiple perspectives on an issue can often be found on the same page or in the same section, but online, each opinion or side of the story lives separately. The Gazette linked an editorial and three letters to the editor about a local issue together by using a pull-out box. The box highlighted the fact that the news organization had different perspectives available for users and then linked to each article.
In print, multiple perspectives on an issue can often be found on the same page or in the same section, but online, each opinion or side of the story lives separately. The Gazette linked an editorial and three letters to the editor about a local issue together by using a pull-out box. The box highlighted the fact that the news organization had different perspectives available for users and then linked to each article.
In print, multiple perspectives on an issue can often be found on the same page or in the same section, but online, each opinion or side of the story lives separately. The Gazette linked an editorial and three letters to the editor about a local issue together by using a pull-out box. The box highlighted the fact that the news organization had different perspectives available for users and then linked to each article.
In print, multiple perspectives on an issue can often be found on the same page or in the same section, but online, each opinion or side of the story lives separately. The Gazette linked an editorial and three letters to the editor about a local issue together by using a pull-out box. The box highlighted the fact that the news organization had different perspectives available for users and then linked to each article.
When two opposing groups held rallies on the same day, the Jefferson City News Tribune took the opportunity to show users how they try to be balanced in their reporting. They published two articles (one about each rally) and then added a note at the top of each story linking to the story about the opposing rally. The analytics showed people were navigating to the stories from the link on the opposing story, in some cases.
When two opposing groups held rallies on the same day, the Jefferson City News Tribune took the opportunity to show users how they try to be balanced in their reporting. They published two articles (one about each rally) and then added a note at the top of each story linking to the story about the opposing rally. The analytics showed people were navigating to the stories from the link on the opposing story, in some cases.
The Jefferson City News Tribune used a pull-out box to highlight the variety of coverage and different perspectives included in their stories about an issue. The news organization addressed that the story was about an issue people have mixed feelings about. They then explained what the current article was going to highlight and focus on and then linked to stories that provided a different perspective. They also linked to opinion pieces about the topic.
The Jefferson City News Tribune used a pull-out box to highlight the variety of coverage and different perspectives included in their stories about an issue. The news organization addressed that the story was about an issue people have mixed feelings about. They then explained what the current article was going to highlight and focus on and then linked to stories that provided a different perspective. They also linked to opinion pieces about the topic.
The Jefferson City News Tribune created story pages for some of their bigger stories that provided a summary of the issue and then links to the previous stories written. In addition to a well-written summary of the issue, the news organization highlighted how "balanced and accurate reporting" was a priority for them and that creating a page like this, a one-stop shop with story links for big issues, is one way they are working to provide a full view of the issues.
The Jefferson City News Tribune created story pages for some of their bigger stories that provided a summary of the issue and then links to the previous stories written. In addition to a well-written summary of the issue, the news organization highlighted how “balanced and accurate reporting” was a priority for them and that creating a page like this, a one-stop shop with story links for big issues, is one way they are working to provide a full view of the issues.
WCPO created a pro/con pull-out box on their website for a story to clearly show users both sides of a tax issue. By making it look different on their website they were able to drive users attention to it. The story outperformed in metrics compared to normal metrics for stories like this.
WCPO created a pro/con pull-out box on their website for a story to clearly show users both sides of a tax issue. By making it look different on their website they were able to drive users attention to it. The story outperformed in metrics compared to normal metrics for stories like this.
In an effort to let users know they are listening to them and looking to include all perspectives when reporting a story, WITF added the following to the top of their web stories: ""Here are the most prominent perspectives on this story. We are on the lookout for stereotypes and assumptions in our own work, and we invite you to point out we may have missed. Contact us on our Trusting News page."
In an effort to let users know they are listening to them and looking to include all perspectives when reporting a story, WITF added the following to the top of their web stories: “Here are the most prominent perspectives on this story. We are on the lookout for stereotypes and assumptions in our own work, and we invite you to point out we may have missed. Contact us on our Trusting News page.”
To highlight their push for including multiple perspectives in stories, WITF added the following to the top of some web stories: "WITF strives to provide nuanced perspectives from the most authoritative sources. We are on the lookout for biases or assumptions in our own work, and we invite you to point out any we may have missed. Contact us on our Trusting News page."
To highlight their push for including multiple perspectives in stories, WITF added the following to the top of some web stories: “WITF strives to provide nuanced perspectives from the most authoritative sources. We are on the lookout for biases or assumptions in our own work, and we invite you to point out any we may have missed. Contact us on our Trusting News page.”
After a survey about low trust in media was published, the Christian Science Monitor asked their Facebook followers if they trusted the news organization. Editors said the comments received were "very constructive." They said they received much more praise than criticism and the criticism received was constructive. The news organization made sure to monitor and respond to comments and said they were surprised how enthusiastic people were about providing feedback.
After a survey about low trust in media was published, the Christian Science Monitor asked their Facebook followers if they trusted the news organization. Editors said the comments received were “very constructive.” They said they received much more praise than criticism and the criticism received was constructive. The news organization made sure to monitor and respond to comments and said they were surprised how enthusiastic people were about providing feedback.
The Coloradoan added a note to the top of a story about allegations of sexual misconduct against a local comedian.
The Coloradoan added a note to the top of a story about allegations of sexual misconduct against a local comedian. The newspaper posted their story on the issue later than other news organizations and wanted to explain why. The note read: “To investigate this story, the Coloradoan spent the past month vetting accounts, speaking to police and interviewing all parties involved before publishing this story.” In addition, they wrote a separate editorial about their decision to wait on publishing that explained their reporting process and decision making.
When sharing a story about someone who died by suicide on Facebook, the Coloradoan used the post as a way to explain their approach to covering suicides. The Facebook post read: "It's the Coloradoan's policy not to report on individual suicides unless the act is in a public place or involves a high-profile person, such as in this case. We felt it was important to report on this story to complete our coverage of the case and provide resources for those struggling with mental illness." The news team did a good job responding to commenters in an appropriate tone and used national guidelines from the CDC to help explain their position.
When sharing a story about someone who died by suicide on Facebook, the Coloradoan used the post as a way to explain their approach to covering suicides. The Facebook post read: “It’s the Coloradoan’s policy not to report on individual suicides unless the act is in a public place or involves a high-profile person, such as in this case. We felt it was important to report on this story to complete our coverage of the case and provide resources for those struggling with mental illness.” The news team did a good job responding to commenters in an appropriate tone and used national guidelines from the CDC to help explain their position.
The Jefferson City News Tribune decided to tackle "fake news" rhetoric head-on. They published a simple message on Facebook: "We hate fake news, too." In the post, they also linked to their "about us" page on their website and asked for feedback using a Google Form.
The Jefferson City News Tribune decided to tackle “fake news” rhetoric head-on. They published a simple message on Facebook: “We hate fake news, too.” In the post, they also linked to their “about us” page on their website and asked for feedback using a Google Form.
While covering a local political story that was divisive in the community, the Jefferson City News Tribune decided to write about their approach to covering the issue. On their website they published a column explaining the news decisions they made and how they incorporated coverage from national news organizations. Their goal was to explain to users that they were making news coverage decisions with the public in mind. They said they received positive and negative feedback, with one individual saying the column motivated them to reach out to the newsroom.
While covering a local political story that was divisive in the community, the Jefferson City News Tribune decided to write about their approach to covering the issue. On their website, they published a column explaining the news decisions they made and how they incorporated coverage from national news organizations. Their goal was to explain to users that they were making news coverage decisions with the public in mind. They said they received positive and negative feedback, with one individual saying the column motivated them to reach out to the newsroom.
While working on a long-term investigative project about local law enforcement, WCPO thought about how their users may respond to the story once it was published. They realized they may get pushback for investigating police officers and decided to publish a story explaining why they are holding law enforcement accountable. They also highlight how being a watchdog is part of their mission as a news organization. The news team said the explainer story helped keep the focus on their reporting and what they uncovered instead of anti-cop rhetoric they were anticipating.
While working on a long-term investigative project about local law enforcement, WCPO thought about how their users may respond to the story once it was published. They realized they may get pushback for investigating police officers and decided to publish a story explaining why they are holding law enforcement accountable. They also highlight how being a watchdog is part of their mission as a news organization. The news team said the explainer story helped keep the focus on their reporting and what they uncovered instead of anti-cop rhetoric they were anticipating.
WCPO wrote a web article explaining the important role trust plays in their relationship with their community. The article discussed their participation in the Trusting News project and highlighted how they are going to try to be more trustworthy. The web article also invited feedback from users.
WCPO wrote a web article explaining the important role trust plays in their relationship with their community. The article discussed their participation in the Trusting News project and highlighted how they are going to try to be more trustworthy. The web article also invited feedback from users.
WCPO discussed their core beliefs as a news organization while updating their "about" page on their website. They told users they loved their city, discussed how they strive for accuracy and said one of their goals is to be transparent with users. The post was also shared on Facebook where it received hundreds of comments. The news organization said the post worked well and "people seemed to relate, ask questions and respond" to them.
WCPO discussed their core beliefs as a news organization while updating their “about” page on their website. They told users they loved their city, discussed how they strive for accuracy and said one of their goals is to be transparent with users. The post was also shared on Facebook where it received hundreds of comments. The news organization said the post worked well and “people seemed to relate, ask questions and respond” to them.
WCPO shared a Washington Post article about President Donald Trump on Facebook and added a note about how they choose to cover the president and politicians. They wanted to highlight how they hold people in power accountable because of how it impacts the public.
WCPO shared a Washington Post article about President Donald Trump on Facebook and added a note about how they choose to cover the president and politicians. They wanted to highlight how they hold people in power accountable because of how it impacts the public.
WCPO published a story explaining how the editorial board and process works at their news organization. The story discussed what topics they will focus editorials on and their policy when it comes to endorsing candidates.
WCPO published a story explaining how the editorial board and process works at their news organization. The story discussed what topics they will focus editorials on and their policy when it comes to endorsing candidates.
WITF discussed their participation in the Trusting News project in a post on their website. They also shared the post on Facebook and asked for feedback. Overall, WITF journalists said comments were positive.
WITF discussed their participation in the Trusting News project in a post on their website. They also shared the post on Facebook and asked for feedback. Overall, WITF journalists said comments were positive.
KCRG used the viral, controversial Sinclair Broadcasting video as a jumping off point to talk about their own ownership. In the post, they remind readers of their ethics policy, and state in no uncertain terms that coverage decisions are made locally. The news organization said readers appreciated the openness.
KCRG used the viral, controversial Sinclair Broadcasting video as a jumping off point to talk about their own ownership. In the post, they remind readers of their ethics policy, and state in no uncertain terms that coverage decisions are made locally. The news organization said readers appreciated the openness.
When a suicide occurred on campus, Annenberg Media staff were torn on whether or not they should report on the incident. As they debated their options and talked about the legal issues internally, they also decided to share their thought process and reporting process with their users. Several of the reporters and news managers/professors were interviewed about why they covered the suicide. In the video, posted to Instagram and YouTube, the journalists discussed their policy when it comes to covering suicides and also linked to mental health resources available for those in need.
When a suicide occurred on campus, Annenberg Media staff were torn on whether or not they should report on the incident. As they debated their options and talked about the legal issues internally, they also decided to share their thought process and reporting process with their users. Several of the reporters and news managers/professors were interviewed about why they covered the suicide. In the video, posted to Instagram and YouTube, the journalists discussed their policy when it comes to covering suicides and also linked to mental health resources available for those in need.
When faced with critical comments from a user on Facebook, Standard-Examiner used the opportunity to explain the reasoning behind why they cover certain stories, what requirements a story needs to meet in order to be relevant, and how their advertising department is separate from their newsroom. The commenter wanted them to make promises they couldn't make, but the news organization said it felt the back and forth with the commenter and the newsroom's explanations helped others better understand their news priorities and how they make decisions.
Some users assume journalists sensationalize news to make money. In this example, the accusation was direct: “Standard, has your marketing department worked out how many unique impressions and page views you get per dead kid?” The staff used the opportunity to explain the reasoning behind why they cover certain stories, what requirements a story needs to meet in order to be relevant, and how their advertising department is separate from their newsroom. The commenter wanted them to make promises they couldn’t make, but the news organization said it felt the back and forth with the commenter and the newsroom’s explanations helped others better understand their news priorities and how they make decisions.
The Tennessean created a video to explain why their editorial board asked for a mayor's resignation. The newsroom said it felt the video format added a lot of value to the message and they enjoyed being able to explain how and why the decision was made instead of just writing a column. The newsroom also went live on Facebook to explain their decision.
The Tennessean created a video to explain why their editorial board asked for a mayor’s resignation. The newsroom said it felt the video format added a lot of value to the message and they enjoyed being able to explain how and why the decision was made instead of just writing a column. The newsroom also went live on Facebook to explain their decision.
The Tennessean went live on Facebook to explain why their editorial board asked for a mayor's resignation. By going live on Facebook the journalists provided users a place to be heard and receive feedback.The newsroom also created a video to explain how and why the decision was made.
The Tennessean went live on Facebook to explain why their editorial board asked for a mayor’s resignation. By going live on Facebook the journalists provided users a place to be heard and receive feedback. The newsroom also created a video to explain how and why the decision was made. 
Screenshot from WITF's website, showing a post with the headline: "Media is criticized; not trusted by half of Americans"
During a daily, live radio show, WITF put the focus of the show on journalism and declining trust in news. They invited industry experts and took questions from listeners, which they answered after the show. The show was honest about the issues facing the industry while also offering insight into how news works.
Screenshot from WCPO's website, showing a post with the headline: "WCPO leadership makes decisions about what stories the station covers every day"
WCPO talked directly to their users about their story selection process. In a post on their website, they talked about what types of questions are involved when they make decisions about what to cover and what not to cover. Included in the note was mention of their approach to stories involving suicide and their approach to covering car accidents. The news team also shared the story on Facebook and received over 100 comments from users.
After receiving a lot of criticism for a published "letter to the editor," the State decided to add an editor's note to the bottom of all letters printed by the news organization. The note reads, "The State publishes a cross section of the letters we receive from South Carolinians in order to provide a forum for our community and also to allow our community to get a good look at itself, for good or bad. The letters represent the views of the letter writers, not necessarily of The State."
After receiving a lot of criticism for a published letter to the editor, The State decided to add an editor’s note to the bottom of all letters printed by the news organization. The note reads, “The State publishes a cross section of the letters we receive from South Carolinians in order to provide a forum for our community and also to allow our community to get a good look at itself, for good or bad. The letters represent the views of the letter writers, not necessarily of The State.”
To explain how they gather information and fact-check the information they receive, the Community Impact Newspaper group wrote a story for their website. The story focused on a recent article about opioid abuse and discussed how they try to balance opinions and viewpoints published in their news content.
To explain how they gather information and fact-check the information they receive, the Community Impact Newspaper group wrote a story for their website. The story focused on a recent article about opioid abuse and discussed how they try to balance opinions and viewpoints published in their news content.
While searching for a photo to depict the country of Africa, the Christian Science Monitor news team realized it did not have appropriate photos to include in the story. They decided to talk openly with their users about what they felt was a lack of photos options. In the post, they also discussed how they were going to obtain photos to better depict the country in a fair and appropriate way.
While searching for a photo to depict the country of Africa, the Christian Science Monitor news team realized it did not have appropriate photos to include in the story. They decided to talk openly with their users about what they felt was a lack of photos options. In the post, they also discussed how they were going to obtain photos to better depict the country in a fair and appropriate way.
While sharing a crime story on Facebook, the Coloradoan received questions about how they approach covering crime stories. In the comments section of the Facebook post, the news organization explained their crime coverage policy and answered questions from users.
While sharing a crime story on Facebook, the Coloradoan received questions about how they approach covering crime stories. In the comments section of the Facebook post, the news organization explained their crime coverage policy and answered questions from users.
After sharing some information about how they cover crime on Facebook, the Coloradoan decided to write a web story going into more detail about what their crime coverage policy is. By creating a separate page they are able to link to this when future questions up and can easily update it if their policy changes.
After sharing some information about how they cover crime on Facebook, the Coloradoan decided to write a web story going into more detail about what their crime coverage policy is. By creating a separate page they are able to link to this when future questions up and can easily update it if their policy changes.
When a commenter on Facebook was critical of language included in a story, the Enid staff responded directly and explained why the information was included. For this particular story, the information was coming directly from an affidavit so the journalist explained that it was official information from a court document and that is why they decided to include it in their story.
When a commenter on Facebook was critical of language included in a story, the Enid staff responded directly and explained why the information was included. For this particular story, the information was coming directly from an affidavit so the journalist explained that it was official information from a court document and that is why they decided to include it in their story.
After creating a poll on Facebook about guns, the Standard-Examiner received a question about the words they were using to describe certain guns. The news organization explained why they were using certain terms and asked for feedback from users about the issue.
After creating a poll on Facebook about guns, the Standard-Examiner received a question about the words they were using to describe certain guns. The news organization explained why they were using certain terms (and the role the Associated Press played in that) and asked for feedback from users about the issue.
WCNC does not normally air the raw footage of officer involved shootings but after reviewing the body camera footage and discussing it internally, they decided to air portions of video from obtained from local police. Since this was something their users may not be used to seeing, they wrote a story on their website about their decision to air the video and how they came to their decision.
WCNC does not normally air the raw footage of officer-involved shootings but after reviewing the body camera footage and discussing it internally, they decided to air portions of video from obtained from local police. Since this was something their users may not be used to seeing, they wrote a story on their website about their decision to air the video and how they came to their decision.
When WCPO reported on a public official's improper--but not illegal--behavior, they anticipated that readers might question their motivations. So, the news organization published a separate story explaining why editors found the behavior to be newsworthy and how the incident related to larger issues in local government. A call-out reinforced WCPO's commitment to transparent coverage and invited feedback.
When WCPO reported on a public official’s improper–but not illegal–behavior, they anticipated that readers might question their motivations. So, the news organization published a separate story explaining why editors found the behavior to be newsworthy and how the incident related to larger issues in local government. A call-out reinforced WCPO’s commitment to transparent coverage and invited feedback.
Audience members don't always understand the work that goes into a big investigative piece. WITF shined a light on a five-month projecy by discussing all of the work that went into the story: dozens of interviews, hundreds of miles traveled, tons of documents analyzed and input from several editors. In this case, the reporter was happy to share "the story behind the story," which both emphasizes the costs of serious reporting and reinforces the organization's commitment to fair, in-depth reporting.
Audience members don’t always understand the work that goes into a big investigative piece. WITF shined a light on a five-month projecy by discussing all of the work that went into the story: dozens of interviews, hundreds of miles traveled, tons of documents analyzed and input from several editors. In this case, the reporter was happy to share “the story behind the story,” which both emphasizes the costs of serious reporting and reinforces the organization’s commitment to fair, in-depth reporting.
Social media can get a bad rap, but for many newsrooms, it's a key part of how audiences find their coverage. In this post, the social media editor at WITF explains that her goal is to inform and add value to the readers' day. She clearly states that while tracking clicks is part of the job, "we avoid raising your blood pressure for the sake of engagement stats." Finally, she reminds readers of the station's comment policy, and invites feedback and reactions.
Social media can get a bad rap, but for many newsrooms, it’s a key part of how audiences find their coverage. In this post, the social media editor at WITF explains that her goal is to inform and add value to the readers’ day. She clearly states that while tracking clicks is part of the job, “we avoid raising your blood pressure for the sake of engagement stats.” Finally, she reminds readers of the station’s comment policy, and invites feedback and reactions.
Over the course of a week--from the first report of a death of a law enforcement officer, to his memorial service--WITF wrestled with several difficult coverage decisions. Should they report information they confidently knew through informal connections, or wait for official announcements? Should journalists attend the service as members of the public? The editor, who was a friend of one of the people involved, offered a very open, first-person account of how the newsroom approached the highly sensitive story. He writes: "It's important to remember the people we cover are more than just the role they play in a story."
Over the course of a week–from the first report of a death of a law enforcement officer, to his memorial service–WITF wrestled with several difficult coverage decisions. Should they report information they confidently knew through informal connections, or wait for official announcements? Should journalists attend the service as members of the public? The editor, who was a friend of one of the people involved, offered a very open, first-person account of how the newsroom approached the highly sensitive story. He writes: “It’s important to remember the people we cover are more than just the role they play in a story.”
Some audience members assume that journalists will broadcast whatever they hear--or whatever will drum up the most controversy. Inviting them into your editing process can reassure them of your credibility. WITF did just that when it received possibly explosive information. Rather than running with it as a breaking news story, they took a month to vet all the facts, A post from the editor explained their commitment to producing a deeply reported, independent analysis of the issue.
Some audience members assume that journalists will broadcast whatever they hear–or whatever will drum up the most controversy. Inviting them into your editing process can reassure them of your credibility. WITF did just that when it received possibly explosive information. Rather than running with it as a breaking news story, they took a month to vet all the facts, A post from the editor explained their commitment to producing a deeply reported, independent analysis of the issue.
Hashtags can let your Twitter followers know what type of story you're sharing at a glance, helping them to frame their expectations before even landing on your website. The Virginian-Pilot created hashtags to better categorize content on Twitter for their users. They created #VPColumn and #VPEditorial for opinion content, and #VPBreaking for developing stories.
Hashtags can let your Twitter followers know what type of story you’re sharing at a glance, helping them to frame their expectations before even landing on your website. The Virginian-Pilot created hashtags to better categorize content on Twitter for their users. They created #VPColumn and #VPEditorial for opinion content and #VPBreaking for developing stories.

screenshot from thegazette.com, showing a pull-out box with multiple perspectives.

 

screenshot from thegazette.com, showing a pull-out box with multiple perspectives.
The Gazette highlighted how they bring multiple perspectives into each story they cover by adding a pull-out box to their web story. The box highlighted what people on each side of the issue thought, shared a link to their in-depth coverage and asked users for feedback.
Screenshot from communityimpact.com, reading: Editor’s note: Community Impact Newspaper has been following the paid sick leave issue since the city began gathering input for a potential citywide ordinance. Throughout Community Impact Newspaper‘s reporting, viewpoints from all sides of the issue have been expressed. Please click this link to find all previous coverage on this issue.
Balanced reporting can happen over time, but readers don’t always see the full breadth of your coverage. An editor’s note can draw attention to the wide variety of sources you’ve interviewed—and highlight your promise to keep sharing a range of perspectives.
WCPO addiction story
WCPO highlighted their commitment to their community in a Facebook post when they shared a link to a story about heroin addiction. They focused on how this particular story is one of hope.