Spectator

Thomson Reuters would like its employees to stop blogging, socializing

Posted on April 30, 2008 by Douglas Bell


image for Thomson Reuters would like its employees to stop blogging, socializing

In case you’d forgotten or ever cared, 40 per cent of The Globe and Mail is owned by the Thomson family through their holding company Woodbridge. Woodbridge also owns, as the result of last year’s multibillion-dollar merger of Thomson Corporation and Reuters, 53 per cent of the new (and aptly named) entity Thomson Reuters. Lately, this new enterprise has started rolling out its new brand, including a near bottomless, fancy-pants Web site and a full-page ad on A6 of Monday’s Globe. Here’s an excerpt from the Web site:

The end of think.
The beginning of know.

As information continues to democratize, even the smartest algorithms aren’t smart enough. Thomson Reuters offers a more human intelligence. Every day, thousands of experts evaluate and refine our data. Lawyers, doctors, scientists, accountants—people who know what you need because they do what you do. So when our information reaches you, it’s not just conjecture.

It’s knowledge you can act on.

Now maybe I’m reading a little too much into this, but if I were a journalist at either Reuters or the Globe, that bit about “conjecture” might give me pause (to say nothing of the creepy implication of the headline and the not-so-subtle put-down of democracy). And my worries would no doubt grow as I looked deeper into the Reuters Thomson Web site, where I’d notice that journalism isn’t exactly front and centre in the new company’s mandate. It seems more about business to business than all the news that’s fit to print.

Moreover, several media outlets have picked up on the new company’s code of ethics, which discourages blogging as a means of interoffice communication and strongly recommends against fraternization between Reuters Thomson employees and their colleagues in competing enterprises.

The code includes…a section devoted to fair competition. It states that employees who attend a conference, trade show, association event, or meeting should ‘limit informal contact to the extent possible and keep a written summary of any discussions that may have taken place.’

Among thirsty journos, this could put a wee bit of a crimp in their usual style.

• Thomson Reuters
• Thomson Reuters: Internal blogging ban for staff [Journalism]
• Thomson Reuters’ Ethics Code: Blogging’s OK, Just Don’t Talk To Competitors [Washington Post]
• Thomson Reuters’ new code of ethics on blogging and talking with competitors [Editors’ Weblog]

Comments

Neither the author nor Toronto Life necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Editors will not correct spelling or grammar. Toronto Life reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. Read our full policy

You must register to post comments. Please register here.

charley April 30, 2008 at 9:58 p.m.

I don't find very appealing the idea of "great minds" sifting through the facts for me and deciding what I need to know. I prefer the individual's take on events whether it's a reporter, columnist or blogger and they have to stand by, defend or perhaps modify their opinion depending on the nature of the counter-arguments they provoke. I don't even like the anonymous newspaper editorial-I'd prefer a person's name to it so they can be held accountable.

charley May 1, 2008 at 9:32 a.m.

The end of think the beginning of know--very disturbing mantra. To me "know" implies certainty, close-mindedness, no need to engage others with different opinions. "Think" implies the opposite-seeking, open to different approaches, willing to engage even those with totally opposing idealogies. I think casey wrote on another thread that she repected those who stuck by their beliefs, "right or wrong". Wouldn't it be better to respect also someone who had the courage to admit maybe they were mistaken about something and able to modify their outlook? Also jade-lee wrote a few threads ago she felt it was a waste of time arguing with someone because they had a totally different "school of thought". These are the very people you should be engaging-you'll never move forward if you just interact with like-minded people! Where's the stimulus to re-examine self?

jade_lee May 2, 2008 at 11:49 a.m.

I agree Charley and I do continue to address what Lit types here. But there comes a time when you must acknowledge differences of opinions that are due to life experiences or the ways you are socialized. I just made a point of saying that most likely we disagree because we just don't think alike in most areas covered on this blog and that it was futile to think otherwise. It was an informed statement that I typed based on the many months of discussion here.

charley May 3, 2008 at 9:14 a.m.

You're right, JL, my theories tend to a little too abstract. Of course, in real life you have to budget your time and energy to address what you think is worth the effort.

Post a comment

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment: