Live Coverage

He says most ombudsman where he is only started in 2007

Tammerk: Also, commercial pressure, was increasingly mentioned: news and advertising being mixed up, in countries like Turkey, for example

Tammerk:
Other typical cases: elections, political issues. As public expect very balanced view. Which political parties have the right to appear in national debates and which don't (J-Source: Sounds familiar for us Canadians, right?)

Typical cases part three

Some of the more subjective stuff, such as liberal v. mainstream bias, direction of the newspaper and sensationalism, and choices of letters to the editor, and taste, suitability for kids, violence, anchors on TV

Main concerns: how to keep up with the workload, increasing invisibility, and also how to be relevant

Tammerk gives an example of a person from Kenya who had been in office for two months only. She said: "striking a balance between good relations with newsroom and being responsive to readers"

Tammerk: So,
whether you've been in office for two months, two years, or 10 years, this is a key concern for readers.

Another question: Where are ombudsman situated in newsroom? Is it in the very centre? Is it up in the corner at the top room where people don't even know it's there? Is it at the end of a long corridor on the floor with administration (where he sits). Tammerk says he doesn't want to be part of day-to-day decision making process, because it would bring him too close to day-to-day of reporters. i.e. Then he'd know if the reporter produced a bad story because of a personally bad day, such as a break-in in her home, etc.

Tammerk says this is something ombudsman should be discussing in public, i.e. We won't take any complaints that are more than X years old

Tammerk says shat isn't happening any more: discussion on anonymous comments. It's either we've gotten used to it, or they're being regulated, or moderated, in a new or different way

Interacting with readers, viewers and listeners: How does the audience get in touch with us? Of course we know email is first. What is second? Calling is second, but what percentage, roughly? 10? 5? By e-mail 90 per cent, ranging from 60 - 95 per cent of total communications. By phone five per cent. By regular mail, about two per cent

Very rarely do people get in touch with ombudsmen via the organization's website. And sometimes, yes, they do visit the office.

As for the question of do you use social media yourself [to broadcast decisions, etc.] The answer: about 50/50 [of those ombudsmen surveyed]

Tammerk: But the audience seems to expect something more definitive from us

Priorities for ONO:
--Several people said want organization to continue to focus on ethics involving standards in social media and other digital content, sourcing, attribution in digital content
--conquer the world: Africa, Asia, the Arab world [also some places in Europe}
--building more contact between ONO member
--spreading the ethical practice to bloggers
--share best practices
--more specifics of public service broadcasting
--discussing reasons for the declining standards of quality of media
--how to tackle news

OK, everybody, it's time for our lunch break. When we come back: The Honorable Hugh Segal, Senator, Parliament of Canada, "Do Standards Still Matter?" And after: Panel on Different Challenges to Ombudsmanship, Moderator: Lars Bennike, TV 2, Denmark Panelists: Mark Prendergast, Stars & Stripes, U.S.A., Lisa Shepard, NPR, U.S.A., Jan van Groesen, Mediaombudsman, The Netherlands

What does doing better mean?

"No one has the right to their own facts"

Segal says when we become casual about how important the truth of a fact fact is, we are becoming casual about the search for truth

Let me ask some congenial truth questions, which may help make my point: In celebration of Wikileaks docs made public, as anybody asked if Wikileaks changed the chronology? Has there been influence in what docs have been released? Does the bias of Wikileaks matter? Tough questioning on those docs that reflect constructively v. those that don't?