Want a relationship based on trust? Invest in interactions.

This is part of a series about earning trust during unusual times. It covers journalistic purpose, credibility, funding and engagement.

How can journalism be a catalyst for and host of community conversation? How can that conversation — happening entirely online these days — be a constructive, not destructive force? How do journalists know what their communities need from them — and what they really think of them?

While answering those questions looks different depending on the newsroom, doing so is as important now as it’s ever been. There are clear benefits to both journalists and news consumers. Here are some key reasons newsrooms should invest in meaningful online engagement right now.

In a hurry? Jump straight to a tip sheet with suggested language and quick strategies for investing in engagement.

1. Conversations around our work are a key part of the journalism

Comments can have such potential as a forum for ideas and a valuable feedback loop. But they don’t get that way on their own. And when they’re bad, they can be really bad.

Research tells us that perceptions of the credibility of journalism are affected by what happens in comments. The Center for Media Engagement found that “uncivil comment sections can change impressions of the news and may hurt the news brand.” Another study found that when users are complaining about a story, the bandwagon effect leads other users to trust it less or think it’s less important.

The good news is that journalists’ involvement can not only mitigate the problems but also turn comments into more productive, civil spaces.

At Trusting News, we like to think about comment moderation as if we’re the host of a party. Imagine that you decide to have people over. You stock the bar, put on some music and throw open the door for anyone to come in. And then you … leave. You hope (assume?) people will be on their best behavior, and you expect to come home to a house that’s still in order.

Ridiculous, right? We count on an event’s host to connect people, to gently redirect someone who gets a bit unruly, and to call that person a cab if necessary. Everyone appreciates a host that values guest experiences.

This is true in comments as well. Journalists can validate good behavior (hitting “like” on a comment is so quick and simple), contribute to conversations, answer questions and reprimand people who are ruining the vibe.

Moderation works best when it’s based on a solid comment policy. (If you need help writing one, the folks at Coral have a fantastic guide, with examples.) Post your code of conduct or community guidelines on your website and in the “about” section of your Facebook page to set expectations. Then warn or ban people who blatantly break the rules. Doing so rewards people who follow the rules. It’s a sign of respect toward your commenting community.

Tell the story of what you value by making it clear that you stand for civility. That builds stronger relationships. Look for opportunities to challenge people who are being inappropriately rude (especially toward each other or the regular people featured in your stories). And don’t hesitate to ban people who ruin it for everyone else. Say something like:

We know you value civility, and we do too. That’s why our comment policy sets some ground rules (include a link). We’ve banned a few commenters who were making personal attacks, and we’ll continue to keep an eye on things. Thanks to everyone who’s contributing to productive and respectful conversations.

Consider whether you can commit to deleting misinformation from comments, then let people know you’re doing it. Consider whether you want to allow commenters to speculate about the personal lives of people in stories, or air private grievances in your conversation space. If not, let people know clearly what will and won’t be tolerated. Then kick violators out of the party.

2. We want to hear from our communities

That’s true, right? We want the public (you know, the people we aim to serve) to ask us questions and let us know what they need from us. We want them to tell us how we’re doing. We want to know how we could do better.

Obviously, many comments aren’t particularly productive or thoughtful. But if we learn to interpret them — and if we try to make them better — we can learn so much.

Mike Canan at WCPO is a longtime partner of Trusting News, and he wrote for us about why he does Facebook Q&As with viewers. He says the direct feedback he gets helps shape newsroom conversations and decisions. Some of his favorite strategies for comment engagement include:

• Asking commenters to get specific when they have complaints, so he can more authentically respond to them.
• Acknowledging the newsroom makes mistakes.
• Acknowledging the media landscape is complicated and sometimes irresponsible.
• Being as human as possible in tone and style.

Mike does a great job answering questions journalists might usually ignore in a way that doesn’t talk down to commenters. There’s a lot of media literacy involved as well — he takes time to explain how Facebook works, where national stories come from and what it means to strive to be nonpartisan in political coverage. He wrote: “Of course, there are some people who will always hate you. Trust is hard to win and easy to lose. And like in real relationships, there are some people who might never trust you again. But I’ve found that the effort, the transparency and the vulnerability win a lot of people over.”

Another reason to pay attention to comments is to look for coverage ideas. This is true in your own comment spaces and also in other online conversations.

At the Columbia Missourian, community outreach director Elizabeth Stephens noticed a post in mid-March in a local Facebook group about how people who weren’t online very much hadn’t heard about flattening the curve and didn’t understand it. She joined the conversation and asked how she could help. The newsroom published a flyer on flattening the curve, inserted it in the print newspaper, turned it into rack cards for newspaper boxes and shared a printable link to it on social media. They also translated it into Spanish. All of this happened because they were watching comments for coverage opportunities.

3. Responding publicly reaches more people than just the question asker

When you hear from a member of your community with a well-intentioned question about your work, it’s lovely if they get a thoughtful answer, isn’t it? Whether the question arrives by email, on the phone or in person, a one-on-one exchange is the result. Those conversations can be so rewarding and important — and they’re also extremely inefficient.

A benefit of answering questions and correcting misassumptions in comments is that you’re reaching everyone who’s reading, not just the question asker.

It’s important to remember that even when comments are snarky or uninformed and perhaps don’t merit a response on their own, if you don’t answer, you’re letting the snarky writer have the last word and missing a chance to correct the public record about your work. Many, many more people read comments than write them. Do you want those people to scroll past an accusation about your work and not find an accompanying rebuttal?

Be selective, but take time to defend and explain your work. Don’t let your detractors have open season on your credibility without joining in. And don’t let earnest, curious community members go unanswered when they inquire about your ethics and processes.

In addition, look for chances to share publicly what you’ve already shared one-on-one. Think about the emails, phone conversations and in-person interactions your staff has had recently. If a journalist has already written a paragraph explaining how she fact-checked a story or how advertising dollars don’t influence news coverage, repurpose that. Turn it into a Facebook post or an Instagram story. Put it in a newsletter. Put it in a box alongside a related story.

The language can be simple: “We know readers are curious about xxx. Here’s how that works.” Or, if you have permission: “Reader Ben Jones gave us permission to share this question he asked us, along with our answer.”

Then start a Google Doc with explanations and answers you find yourself using repeatedly, and share it with the newsroom. Some common questions we see include: Why do you have a paywall? How do you decide what crimes (or sports or community events) are worthy of coverage? Why do you say you care about accuracy but make so many errors? Do you independently fact-check wire stories?

Your time crafting answers becomes much more valuable when you put a process in place to extend the utility of the responses and save your staff time.

4. We can identify trust roadblocks and information gaps

When we begin work with a newsroom or journalist, we often start by talking about what we call trust roadblocks. What gets in the way of trust with your own audience? The themes we see nationally (here’s a slide deck of national research) often show up locally, but there are usually misassumptions, complaints or frustrations specific to a local relationship and community.

Once we’ve identified what gets in the way of trust, we look for information gaps. What do people not understand about our ethics, our motivation for doing the work, our processes and our business? Where is an opportunity for us to earn trust by explaining those things?

After all, if we’re losing credibility because people don’t understand what we do, whose responsibility is it to fill in those information gaps? Who’s going to solve that problem if not us?

Here are some examples of what might appear in a negative comment, what the information gap could be and how a journalist might respond:

• COMPLAINT: You’re only writing a story about this business because you’re out to get them!
• INFORMATION GAP: Why do journalists find it important to write stories that are critical of local businesses?
• RESPONSE: The health department has found repeated violations at this restaurant that are a matter of public safety. As journalists, one of our jobs is to alert the community to how their government is functioning and also to share information that helps keep people safe. We will be sure to also share when these violations are cleared up. Thanks for commenting.

Remember, your goal isn’t necessarily to convince this specific commenter to find your coverage fair. It’s to set the record straight in a public conversation, to everyone who’s listening.

• COMPLAINT: You do so many stories about this high school, and it’s because the sports editor went to school there. You’re so biased! Where’s the love for the other schools in town?
• INFORMATION GAP: How does the sports department decide what to cover?
• RESPONSE: Thanks for commenting. Our staff of three spreads out around the county and tries to get at least one game a season from each of the area teams. We do usually give more coverage to teams that are doing especially well, as this one has for the last couple of seasons. If you looked at our coverage five years ago, you’d see more stories about the cross-town rival.

As you notice trends in these information gaps, identify opportunities to share your answers in a more permanent or prominent way. Do a Facebook Live Q&A about the topic. Write something for your website explaining how you make decisions, and add it on your “About” page or section landing page. Link to it the next time you get the same question. When possible, share your explanations broadly and in a way you can find and share again.

More support

• Want to copy and paste? Here’s our complete set of downloadable tip sheets with suggested language to use as you describe your work to your audience.
• What’s most getting in the way of trust in your work during these strange times? Please tell us in this quick form, so our work can be grounded in what you need.
• We send one quick strategy in our weekly Trust Tips newsletter. Subscribe here.
• We have a collection of 11 (and counting) curated Trust Tips for coronavirus coverage. Find those here.
• Our trust coaches are available to talk through your challenges or help brainstorm ideas one on one. Request a session here.
• Want data? We collect research (our own and others’) around trust in journalism. See the slick deck here.
• Want more newsroom examples? Our website has a database of newsroom examples, and we’re drilling down on examples from COVID-19 coverage.

Trusting News, staffed by Joy Mayer and Lynn Walsh, is designed to demystify the issue of trust in journalism. We research how people decide what news is credible, then turn that knowledge into actionable strategies for journalists. We’re funded by the Reynolds Journalism Institute, the American Press Institute, Democracy Fund and the Knight Foundation.