Category Archives: Blog

Tomorrow’s first year

Tomorrow is one year old today. We launched with The Lunch Bunch, we’ve told you about one of Canada’s most unique leaders, the debate of the shape of parliamentary chambers, the hopes and challenges of a legacy from the London 2012 Paralympic Games, the 20th anniversary of Canada’s last national referendum, indigenous education and health disparities and the trial of the kosher butcher.

We have worked hard to meet our core principles but still have work to do. Our reporting is based on the freedom of expression (principle 1), were have done so accurately (2), independently and with accountability (3), professionally (4), openly (6), we have observed and engaged (9), educated and entertained (10) and promoted responsible debate and mediation (11). Please get in touch if you have any questions about how we work and the principles that we are built upon.

First year statisticsAccording to Google Analytics, we had 4534 visits, 3142 unique visitors and 7407 pageviews. On average, people spent 1 minute and 14 seconds on the site, considerably less than the time to read the many longreads, so that number must be taken with a grain of salt. You will notice from the screengrab that there was a lengthy gap when the site was down after we were hacked. It made for a challenging time in our first year.

Not including our blogs, our stories have totalled almost 37,000 exclusive words. Under principle 6 (duty to openness), we must provide information freely. But if you value the work we’re doing and want us to offer even more words, pictures, audio, video, infographics and much more for our second year, please consider a donation. Even $1 or £1 or whatever currency you like will help us gradually build a fund to pay new reporters for important and engaging exclusives.

We will continue to offer important reporting based on our core principles. Thank you for your support throughout Tomorrow’s first year, and we look forward to justifying that support in our second.

Justice must be seen to be done – both by reporters and the public

Paris Métro moveable walkway has two speeds - just like free speech in court reporting. Photo by Tristan Stewart-Robertson

Paris Métro moveable walkway has two speeds – just like free speech in court reporting. Photo by Tristan Stewart-Robertson

Reporter and directing editor Tristan Stewart-Robertson has presented a paper at the London Conference in Critical Thought 2013 titled “The two speeds of free speech in court reporting”, examining the fundamentals behind Tomorrow’s seventh core principle: justice must be seen to be done. Read the full paper here (20130606.twospeedsFINAL.CT).

If you were to merge the UN Declaration of Human Rights articles 10 and 19, you could develop an  “open justice article”:

“Regardless of frontiers”, everyone has the “freedom to seek, receive and impart information”, at a “public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal”, which is guaranteed by right.

Or, alternatively:

Everyone has the right to public trial, where anyone and everyone has the “freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. 

What do you think? How should open justice be applied to courts and journalism?

Core principles – a model for journalism

Core principles - a model for journalism

Core principles – a model for journalism (published under Creative Commons)

Tomorrow is based on a foundation of core principles, defining how we relate to the community and sources of news, our responsibilities and our methods. Other outlets may centre themselves around the medium and technology used to distribute news (print, video, online, even social media). Tomorrow believes that core principle are a more stable basis for public trust in reporting and for our service to others.

The media, both as individuals and as an organisation, is one circle. The community, including individuals actively creating news or passively reading/viewing its information, is another. “Estates” is another circle, those formal “agencies” of the body politic that sometimes generate information and sometimes conceal it. And access, the final circle, is always in flux, an overlapping of how community and estates and media all interact.

Tomorrow is defined by principles, and it is the physical and information space where the interaction takes place and news is facilitated. News will build community around that core.

Journalism accountability: 2012-2013 accounts for Tomorrow

Under principle 3 (independence and accountability) and principle 6 (duty to openness), today we publish our account summary for 2012-2013. As you can see, there was a loss, but Tomorrow continues forward. Remember, if you value our work, do visit the website and consider any donation via Paypal, or share this page with your friends.

Account summary for Tomorrow, 2012-2013 fiscal year.

Account summary for Tomorrow, 2012-2013 fiscal year.

Scottish press legislation: Tomorrow statement

Draft legislation has been put forward in Scotland,1 where reporter/directing editor Tristan Stewart-Robertson is currently based, for statutory regulation of the media, which would potentially include social media posts on almost any subject.

Tomorrow made its position clear in December on this subject and it will continue to act as a news site subject to our core principles, not to politicians or their appointees. Please see our previous post for more details.

NOTE: This legislation did not progress beyond draft stage.

Our first six months

How’s our first six months been? We’ve made a good start on building community through news. With words, pictures, audio and social media, we’ve used and honoured our core principles to offer better journalism. If you’ve valued our work, consider recommending us to others or a donation in 2013 and help us grow. Wishing all our readers a safe, healthy and happy 2013 when it comes.

Our first six months - by numbers.

Our first six months – by numbers.

Newtown shooting and protecting child interviewees

In light of the Newtown shooting in the US, where media were interviewing very young children, we have to restate our policies ensuring we act as a “safe harbour” (principle 8):

All children under the age of 14 are guaranteed anonymity unless waived by a parent or guardian (directly or through schools, youth clubs, or other organisations). Details of those children [for example, names attached to court proceedings but not published], regardless of whether they are available via social media or through other media outlets, are archived for legal reasons but never revealed. Those children can later choose to waive their anonymity above the age of 14. A single identifying detail, such as an age, or home community, can be used in a publication, with permission, and provided it cannot be used to identify the child from within Tomorrow.is. We cannot ensure anonymity across all media outlets, only our own, but take our position seriously regardless.

Young people aged 14 to 16 are not named automatically but can waive anonymity themselves. We advise those young people to speak to an adult before making that choice but do not enforce any restriction on their right to free expression.

Any young person aged 14 to 18 is advised to use Tor software to ensure maximum anonymity should they feel necessary in provided story tips etc. Any photos submitted will be checked and GPS information removed. Social media messages such as Tweets to Tomorrow.is, when the age of the person is known, will not be repeated where it would expose the social media identity of the individual.

Photographs or videos in public places cannot always ensure children will not be within frame, particularly for breaking or major news events. But we respect the need for the privacy of a child and will do our best to limit such examples to those of significant public interest (for example, children injured within a conflict zone).

There are also examples in the public interest where children under the age of 14 must be interviewed, such as examples of child exploitation or abandonment, outwith permission of an adult. Anonymity is guaranteed and reporters take interactions with children very seriously, and specific training to interview children will be sought where possible.

Tomorrow’s position on the Leveson Inquiry

While Tomorrow was offline after being hacked, the Leveson Inquiry in the UK published its report. The following statement was approved by five independent non-journalists.

***

Tomorrow’s directing editor, Tristan Stewart-Robertson, lives and works in the United Kingdom and is a member of the National Union of Journalists and abides by the Editors’ Code of Practice in his freelance work and shift reporting for newspapers. Because of last week’s report from The Leveson Inquiry in press standards, it is necessary to clarify Tomorrow’s position as a news organisation currently practising in the UK, though our servers are in Iceland and our reporting focused on Canada.

Every example of bad press practices, ethics and illegality cited in the Leveson report would have been blocked by Tomorrow’s core principles. All of these defining 11 points were created before the phone hacking scandal fully erupted in July 2011, but we still stand by the principles as written. They were established to deal precisely with the issue of trust, so fundamental to the current condition of journalism, and to position journalism back at the heart of community, simultaneously reporting for it, yet at the same time independent from it.

Our starting point is freedom of expression – we report on the basis of this first principle. But our right to report is then balanced by the subsequent 10 principles. They are all interconnected. For example, while justice must be seen to be done (principle 7), we must also protect vulnerable witnesses or alleged crime victims from identification (principle 8). While we must educate and entertain (principle 10), it must be accurate (principle 2). And if we make a mistake, we must promote responsible debate and mediation (principle 11) – ie we must ensure an arbitration with individuals where they dispute the accuracy or application of other principles at Tomorrow.

Also, being a safe harbour to the public and staff (principle 8) means we have to protect a measure of privacy to individuals (ranging from information such as bank details etc on a broad scale, to complete anonymity in specific cases such as rape victims). We must also protect our staff when they are in turn protecting sources, even under threat of imprisonment, so as to meet both principle eight and ensure the defence of principle one.

As well as dealing with data according to relevant laws, we apply the “safe harbour” principle to our work with information, specifically, the Three Laws for Digital Systems and Journalists:

  1. Digital systems must be designed to protect, to the fullest extent possible, personal data and its exchange and communication.
  2. Journalists must pursue all stories deemed to be in the public interest, even where that may require challenging the security of digital systems.
  3. Journalists must protect their sources as well as the innocent public to the same extent as the digital systems of the First Law, where it would otherwise render the impossibility of the Second Law.

Tomorrow intends to put in place a Citizens’ Jury system independent of our work – please see our explainer of this system [Feb 2013: Amendment of original post which referred to an independent panel].

Finally, Leveson’s report states:

“The internet does not claim to operate by express ethical standards, so that bloggers and others may, if they choose, act with impunity. The press, on the other hand, does claim to operate by and adhere to an ethical code of conduct.”

And:

“People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular assurance or accuracy; it need be no more than one person’s view.”

Tomorrow rejects the distinction between the press, as a profession, and the internet, as a medium. Tomorrow is part of the free press, and operates on the internet. We are founded on core principles precisely so that we can be trustworthy, with the internet allowing even greater proof of accuracy through links, footnotes, supplemental information and context beyond a newspapers limited space. The internet also helps meet principle six (a duty to openness).

Given Leveson’s basic failure to recognise the changing nature of journalism and the digital world, and furthermore to account for a balance of the freedom to express and report AND be governed by ethics and principles, Tomorrow cannot sign up to the regulation proposed by Leveson.

Problems with accuracy at the BBC

With controversy over the “shoddy journalism” at the BBC, we’d like to offer a note on Tomorrow’s basic story flow.

As well as having to check every aspect of a story initially, each report must be sub-edited twice and then re-read by the reporter before being published. This may not always catch every typo or mistake through phrasing, but we strive to ensure all information is accurate and backed by footnotes where necessary (to meet principle 2 – accuracy). In certain circumstances, we might include information which cannot be verified, but we would make it clear that it was not verified and explain why we were still including it.

The process in these early stages of Tomorrow’s development may be slower than most web-based news organisations, but it is necessary to meet the demands of our principles.

If you have questions about how we work, or a story you would like us to look into, please get in touch.

Parts of the BBC Newsnight report into allegations of abuse at a children’s home in Wales would not have met principles 2 (accuracy), 4 (professional conduct and service), 8 (be a safe harbour for the public and staff) and 11 (promote responsible debate and mediation). The subject matter overall, however, is justified by 5 (comfort the afflicted and afflict the complacent), 8 (this principle goes both for and against in some cases), 9 (observe and engage), 10 (educate and entertain) and 11.

Robert Kaplan death: Tomorrow statement

Tomorrow notes the passing of former Canadian cabinet minister and creator of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Robert Kaplan. We requested an interview with Mr Kaplan in September for our Charlottetown Accord series, unaware of his declining health. Mr Kaplan was still kind enough to politely decline, via an email dictated through a family member. He wished us luck with the project.

A news organisation requires people to tell us their stories, and we appreciate the respect afforded us when potential interviewees acknowledge what we’re trying to report, even if they say ‘no’. An overwhelming majority of requests for this series went unanswered, and Mr Kaplan’s respect in declining stood out significantly. Our condolences to his family.