I received two requests last week to take down specific posts. I won’t say who asked, or which posts, but they weren’t the first time someone has made the request and it surely won’t be the last. My standard answer is “No, it would violate my readers’ trust, and would be a disservice to all.” Which I honestly believe.
But the two requests this week differed so starkly, and one of them I’m considering honoring. I’d like your opinion before I go ahead with anything.
Here’s the scenario for the first request. This one is typical:
A subject of a post – be it person or business – felt embarrassed by what we wrote or an image we posted. The post isn’t scandalous, or even necessarily negative against them, but for whatever reason they construe it as a threat. Apparently, they’d rather not be mentioned at all. Often times, they demand removal in unfriendly terms.
In these situations I give a resounding “No.” It’s sometimes difficult to do so, and I hate to upset those we don’t intend to. I try to make it clear that they are likely the only one projecting a negative or critical tone on it, and that in reality it serves to boost their profile in the community. Still, they usually turn sour at the rebuff.
The latest situation, and the one causing me to rethink an exception, goes as follows:
A subject of a post – in this case a business – had let loose some information that they weren’t prepared to go viral with. It wasn’t private, but they didn’t expect it to be popular either. The resulting success of the post drove traffic to their storefront, with a lot of people asking questions. The business wasn’t prepared for this, and it became more of a stumbling block, and as a result they pulled the information from their own website and asked that we do the same.
In the latter situation, I’m leaning towards removing identifying information in the post, or pulling it completely. Though the information has already been republished on other sites as a result, the business came to me and politely asked for removal. Though I’d hate to remove information I’ve already made public, I’m considering it, but am not sure if it will threaten your trust in our site.
So, the question stands. In the second situation, am I opening the door to alienating readers? Will removing it become a slippery slope to which other businesses can point when they ask to be removed? What sort of standard do you think there should be in Sheepshead Bites retracting information?
Related posts
Print This
- View Comments
- Bits & Pieces
I think that you have to be careful that original postings are not based on rumor / hearsay or fishing for information from readers. I can understand that a business owner would be upset with people flocking to their business for the sole purpose of asking questions, and not as a customer. The real issue is not pulling a posting but maybe putting more thought into the posting itself.
I can’t honestly give my opinion on the matter without knowing who asked and why. Things like this should always be decided on a case by case basis.
There are many things to consider such as the reasons behind the removal. The tone of the party asking such a thing is important too. If someone asks in an angry or threatening tone by first reaction would be to ignore them, but if they come at you professionally with a good reason for removal then it might be worth more consideration.
If the information has already spread to other websites then removing it at that point only looks unprofessional.
It’s a brand new world and small businesses need to adapt, especially since local bloggers like yourself cut your teeth on stories that bigger news outlets would ignore.
In the case of public figures, I don’t think anything should ever be removed. The public has an expectation of openness and honesty from pols and from news sources regarding them, and so long as the site does it’s due diligence and labels the difference between opinion (in an editorial) and fact (in a story) there is no reason IMO to remove anything. If a member of the public comments then that’s just life.
neighbor: We’re not talking about stories based on rumor. Both the stories were based on fact and fully reported. There were no inaccuracies. Thanks for the vote of confidence, though.
Never take down anything. No exceptions. Once you do for one you will do for it others. Others will expect it.
If anything you can make clarifying statements to make your post more clear, or more factual.
If the post was not slanderous or inaccurate, you should not take it down. If some business has a problem they should be able to freely respond/refute the issue on this board.
Ned: You have good instincts – stick with them.
News is supposed to be timely. Otherwise it isn’t news. One probably should try to receive a verification about the information from the subject if the article is going to be neutral-toned, or if critical, the business or individual should be given a chance to present an alternative view. But sometimes that is just not possible, and then it’s a judgment call. There are going to be times that the outcome will make you wonder whether you were premature but this will happen to anyone who has to make editorial decisions. Even the New York Times has on occasion jumped on a benign story too quickly for the comfort of those involved. But that’s the news business for you.
It should be like a newspaper: what’s printed can’t be erased, but a clarification/retraction could be printed in the next issue.
In case of a blog, “next issue” is merely an edit.
If you are going to make posts, you must be prepared to stand by them. Never take them down. If you do, you lose crediblity.
Never take a post down unless the information in it was wrong. Then you should take it down and put up a new post with a retraction, not a simple edit of the original.
I agree completely with your reaction to the first scenario.
On the second, I think you should let the post stand as is. The business had already publicized the information on their own website, they put it out there first. It’s too bad that they got more attention than they were prepared to accept, but that’s the net.
Stick your guns and your principles. If posts can be changed simply because the subject doesn’t like it you’ve lost all your credibility.
while you are removing stuff,.. can you remove all the shopping cart series posts…lol
I agree that if a story is accurate and factual it should not be removed. The party that takes issue always has the opportunity to speak or write his own side of the story or even clarify. This is not true for all news mediums. That is one of the features which makes this medium of communication unique. That and the exchange of thoughts and ideas and the chance to comment. Freedom of the press and all that.
You specifically ask what sort of standard there should be in Sheepshead Bay Bites retracting information. JMO but retracting should only be used if by some unlikely course of events the information you report is untrue or found to be flawed somehow.
A lot of this has been said Ned, just wanted to throw in my 2 cents.
I asked my last name not be used and it was taken out but there was already a blog page with my name on it. If it is already out there then taking it down now won’t matter much. Altering it (if possible) without changing facts would be OK for future viewers of said posting.
If there was a true error it should be retracted and listed in a “correction section”.
So unless you are taking BIG BUCKS, use your judgement. ;-p
I suggest leaving the article “title” up with a comment “removed at the _______’s request.
That would keep all us constant viewers from thinking we’re going crazy.
Ned, How do you (or myself actually) start a new thread on open thread Monday?
Laura, just comment in here even if its a new topic to discuss. Ned only posts 1 Open Thread post a week and it’s meant for open discussion not just for the chosen topic.
Hi Laura, what’s your thread?
Hi and thanks for the replies. I want to vent but I am also posting for informational purposes. I decided to to “The Gateway Mall” at Erskine and it was a last minute trip, it really could have waited. When I looked out my door at I could see from down the block the Belt was bumper to bumper, I went back in and turned on channel 61 which is part of channel 12 and waited a few minutes for the traffic report. They said there was a little delay at Knapp, where a lane was closed around the Knapp street exit. I figured how bad could that be (I get on at Knapp entrance). I really was counting on the snag being a short one for maybe a couple(2) miles. By Flatbush Ave we were still crawling and using all three lanes all along (no closed lanes). I should have gotten off at Flatbush, my mistake! I stayed on and the next exit is Rockaway PKWY which is over 2 miles and I was going to just get off at Rockaway PKWY and come home. Just before Rockaway PKWY exit there were two lanes closed for about 1/2 miles and then free sailing. It took me 45 minutes to get to Rockaway PKWY and I did stay on at that point, but don’t trust any traffic report from that station. I would have never ventured onto the Belt at Knapp or at all if I knew what the deal was. Totally inaccurate report on the TRAFFIC REPORT. A 12-15 ride took almost 50 minutes. By the way 1010 am on the radio in the car had it right.
I always marvel at radar maps that show that it is pouring here and yet, stepping outside it is merely a drizzle.
Laura, a few years ago, I was commuting between Williamsburg, BK and Norwalk, CT. I hated taking the Triboro (that’s what kids called it back then) so I headed to the Whitestone instead. Traffic reports on 1010 WINS would typically call for smooth sailing or slight delays. Um, well, that was true for the Whitestone BRIDGE, but somehow they totally failed to mention that the entire length of the Whitestone EXPRESSWAY was a parking lot. Their traffic report was right on a technicality but I still would end up spending an extra 30 minutes on a commute that was already clocking in well over an hour to start off with.
Oh, and Ned, I will be pissed off at you if you take down or neuter information that was factually correct and previously publicized by the subject. Just my $0.02.
I don’t know if I’d be pissed off – but for the most part I think posts should stay up (assuming it’s not defamatory, violating someone’s intellectual property, etc. etc.). At the very least, if you’re going to start taking down posts there should be a policy that explicitly states under what limited criteria you will remove one (so as to avoid the situation Dan from GB.net mentions, in which more people start requesting take downs)
Hey Ned, what makes this site work is your diligence in pointing out the quirks of our neighborhood. Love it or not, skewing already posted info, will make it seem less of a friendly place where moderators are anxiously sitting by to remove questionable content.
Ned, with regard to gene, who posted his comment at 2 p.m., would you please remove all defaming comments regarding the ingenious shopping cart posts.
i don’t think you should take any information down. it’s funny how businesses/politicians/etc. don’t mind positive press, but as soon as one critical or questioning article gets published, they go all ape shit.
i’ve been reading this blog for a quite a while, and so far none of the content has been out of line or intentionally inaccurate or trying to bash sheepshead bay. keep up the good work and always trust your instincts
and laura, thanks for the tip. i too drive around the area and could always use good traffic report tips
i do think that there should be a rule that no criticisms of the Editors special pet projects be allowed at all. Especially those that fail to appreciate the hard work one of the editors puts in each week to enlighten us to as to the ongoing plight of Sheepshead Bay’s large shopping cart population.
Perhaps a FAQ page should be written regarding such matters.
Heh, heh, heh!
ASSOCIATED PRESS – The shopping cart filed a defamatory suit in Kings County Supreme Court Monday morning. A lawyer for the shopping cart decried the web site’s statements as “shockingly truthful,” “allegedly popular,” and “exactly what I was saying before I wasn’t saying it anymore.”
Lisanne, Faq does sound better than my suggestion “correction section”.
It may not need correction. wink-wink
Brian: Hahahah! When I get THAT suit in particular, I’m closing shop and moving to South America.
Lisanne: Even the editors can’t criticize the other editors’ pet projects. Or at least one can’t criticize the other. I’ll let you guess who can’t criticize who, but I’ll tell you this, Ray yells at me a lot.
Everyone else:
The crowd has spoken. The crowd has been heard. We at Sheepshead Bites promise not to remove content unless factually incorrect, and in those instances clearly marked corrections will be published and labeled as such. There won’t be a correction section, of a FAQ, as I really hope inaccuracies won’t happen that often. We’ll give this system a test run, but if people are concerned about corrections getting buried, we’ll look into devising a way to make it more prominent (perhaps an “errata” column in the sidebar?)
Jo hit the nail on the head for the most part, though the business in the latest case wasn’t worried about bad press, they didn’t want ANY press at all.
It’s funny though – some people know exactly how to handle bad press. When we ran an item about a condo in Gravesend a few weeks ago that got a lot of attention in the NYC blogs, the realtor for the condo came, laughed it off, called me bitter, and then thanked me for the free advertising. That’s exactly how all politicians and businesses ought to handle it, because it’s just another way of getting the word out. (Luckily for me, the realtor worked for Fillmore, who I’m in negotiations for advertising with, and I’m glad to see they handled it well. I was honestly worried, but that wasn’t going to stop me from saying what needed to be said.)
The New York Times has a correction column. They need it. Especially when they are adding background matter for stories.
Item No. 1 in the FAQ. This is Ned’s baseball field. It is his bats, balls an gloves we are playing with. He does not supply uniforms.
Laura,
use google maps traffic feature for your traffic reports,.. they are usually dead on accurate, sometimes they almost pin point the area where it starts and ends.
Gene thanks for the tip. I use google and yahoo for directions, (Mapquest was innaccurate or confusing a few times). I never noticed the traffic feature.