You wouldn't know it these days from my frequent posting of status messages and commentary, but I came to Facebook back in 2006 for strictly business purposes. As a higher education reporter whose only connection to student sources was an .edu e-mail that no one checks and a dorm phone that no one has, the social networking site was invaluable.For years, I've used Facebook to contact interview subjects. One of the best methods is searching groups that are organized around a certain subject. But what happens when the group, or people in it, want to take the relationship to the next step? What's the ethical response when a source wants to "friend" you or a group asks you to be a "fan?"
Let me say that at this point being someone's friend on Facebook means little more than being a real-word acquaintance. Likewise, being a fan of a group doesn't even indicate that you've ever been to an event or met most of the people in that circle.
Still, at the risk of being labeled a traditionalist, I'd hedge toward politely declining these offers in the name of neutrality. It's easier just to accept, of course. But there's a strong argument to be made that publically supporting any group you cover as a journalist shows a bias, just as it would if you signed a petition or made a donation -- though those acts seem more egregious.
Part of this equation, of course, is what you're covering and who you're "fanning." I couldn't imagine a political reporter becoming a fan of the local Democratic or Republican Party. But it'd be easier to envision an arts reporter being a fan of a symphony.
I suppose the question should be this: Does joining an inner circle give you a better chance at hearing about information that could lead to a scoop? And does the possibility of that positive outcome outweigh the potential impression of being aligned with a certain group or cause?
