Isle of Man media fails in its duties?
I came across a rather long post from Richard Murphy’s Tax Research blog yesterday in which he takes a business reporter on the Isle of Man Examiner to task about some comments she’d made.
I know of Richard because, as he said in his post, he is often called upon for comment about Isle of Man tax policies by many high profile media outlets. And so he seen as a respected source. I know the reporter in question because I’ve worked with her on many occasions on behalf of clients, and I contribute a weekly column to the pages she edits. I have a lot of respect for her as journalist.
I am not an expert on tax law and have no intention on weighing in on any points made by Richard in his post. But here is my own point: everything has changed.
Richard is not upset with the reporter because of story or comment she published. A reader had emailed her with a question and she replied directly by email. Said reply was subsequently sent on to Richard. Richard published on his blog the content of the message and that of a subsequent email exchange he had with the reporter. He concludes with this statement:
“In fact, worse than that (and especially in the case of the Isle of Man) it’s my impression that journalists seem to see it as their job to defend the actions of the State on every occasion possible, and actually see it as their job to suppress or discredit any other view, as was attempted here.”
Whoa! This is a pretty dramatic conclusion to get from one email exchange. I’ll be watching the debate with interest.
But, this is not my point. It is that everyone, journalists included, needs to think very carefully before they click send. Interactive social media has changed all the rules of business, personal and professional communication. A hasty reply or offhand comment made to one individual can be shared instantly, and personal messages could posted for millions to see in a matter of minutes, even seconds.
There are no longer any firm rules of communication etiquette. It’s all subjective. It’s complicated.
Filed under: public relations
Subscribe to our feed
Subscribe by Email
Not just one email exchange, I’m afraid. I would not be so rash as to make comment on the basis of that alone.
The comment is based on the very particularly aggressive attitude of the IoM press towards any form of dissent – more aggressive by far than that in Jersey, for example.
I have yet to be interviewed in the IoM without the journalist siding absolutely with the government. Now, I don’t expect journalists to agree with me. But I do expect them to be open minded and to be willing to consider alternative opinion.
My concern is simple. I have not found evidence of that in the IoM. And I am really not sure that it is appropriate for an IoM journalist to question my credibility in the way it was done in the manner referred to in the email exchange I have published. Disagreement is one thing. For the journalist to question credibility because of disagreement alone is something entirely different.
Richard Murphy