Key Points
- We should always make our own editorial judgements on the authenticity of content or information we have sourced from the web
- We should apply our own editorial values before reusing content that is trending on social media.
- We should be open and transparent in our activity on the web
- Where we are engaged in undercover work the level of deception should be proportionate to the subject matter and level of public interest
- We should carefully consider issues of privacy and the law where third-party data is accessed and gathered without explicit consent. We should assess the public interest and appropriateness of the methods.
- Any use of AI tools for research must be actively monitored and its outcomes further assessed by human editorial oversight.
Introduction
The internet plays a central role as a source of much of the content, contributors and information that we use in all our output. However, even though it is an everyday resource we must continue to take care about how the information or content is gathered from the internet and how we use it.
Accuracy and impartiality
We should always make our own checks on the authenticity and veracity of information or content we find on the web – just as we would if the information came to us through an offline route.
Different websites will have different standards for truth and accuracy. Even the information from apparently reliable sources may not always be accurate or complete. We must make our own editorial judgements before we choose to use material or information sourced from anywhere in the web.
(See Editorial Guidelines: Section 3 Accuracy 3.4.11)
Similarly we should be aware of the potential for bias in the use or misuse of content by other websites. We should use what we find accordingly – providing context and attribution where appropriate.
We should check whether we have the right to use the information and materials gathered from publicly available sources. Advice is available from the IP Legal team.
(See Editorial Guidelines: Section 11 Statistics, Data, Polls and Surveys 11.4.18)
Consent and Access
The Editorial Guidelines state: "The BBC would not normally engage in hacking or commission hacking activities by third parties". (7.4.45)
We should carefully consider any privacy or legal issues where third-party data is accessed or gathered without explicit consent, including through hacks or leaks. Before using such information, we should consider how it is obtained and whether there is significant public interest in using it.
Using data acquired by hacking can only be justified in exceptional circumstances where there is significant public interest.
For further guidelines about hacking and leaks, including mandatory referrals, see Editorial Guidelines Section 7: Privacy 7.4.44 - 7.4.45 and Section 11: Statistics, Data, Polls and Surveys 11.4.20 -11.4.21.
Using computer programmes to scrape or extract data from public facing parts of websites may be in breach of their terms of use and raise privacy and data protection issues. It may also bring their services under excessive pressure by sending a large number of requests within a short period of time. We should carefully consider whether there is public interest in the information and whether the methods are appropriate. For further guidelines about proposals to scrape websites for data or to use data scraped from websites see Editorial Guidelines Section 11: Section 11: Statistics, Data, Polls and Surveys 11.4.18 – 11.4.19.
Social media
Editorial Guidelines say: 'When video and images from social media and other websites accessible to the public are used by the BBC, they may gain greater authority than on other digital platforms.' (7.4.10)
We should apply our own values to using material that is being widely shared on social media. There may be issues around privacy, harm and offence, duty of care and consent to content that has 'gone viral' that could affect our decision to report or use that material on our own platforms.
We should also consider whether it is appropriate to report on content that is being widely shared simply because it is being widely shared or trending. We should ask ourselves what the editorial justification is for doing so first.
Where we are researching contributors or points of view we should be aware of the serendipitous nature of social media that means people may only come across the calls to action by chance.
Social media platforms will also reflect different and particular demographics so contributors or opinion sourced through social media will not be representative of any wider group in any way. That doesn't mean we shouldn't use them, but we should take into account the wider editorial issues before doing so.
(See guidance: User Generated and Social Media Content)
Open research
Where we are posting on websites or social media to find contributors or research material, we should always be open and transparent about who we are and what we are doing.
That also includes where we wish to engage with online communities or closed social media groups. Generally, it is good practice to work with the consent of the group administrators, respecting both the terms and conditions and the culture of the community.
Individuals may choose to use official BBC accounts or their own personal accounts to conduct research in consultation with their editor. When they chose to use their own accounts, they should make it clear that they are working for the BBC. The content of their account should be appropriate in a more professional environment and/or their privacy settings should be properly restricted.
Where we provide contact details, we should use a business address. Where we use email to communicate with contributors sourced from our internet research we should normally use BBC email addresses.
(See Editorial Guidelines Section 6: Fairness 6.4.21)
Offensive and Harmful Material
Where we are researching areas that might result in accessing content that might be harmful, offensive or distressing we should consider whether it is appropriate to undertake that research in an open room. It may be necessary to work in a private room with a closed door.
Staff should ensure that they have editorial approval and oversight for this research and where necessary – for example if they have justification for accessing offensive materials, such as pornographic websites – seek approval from the BBC Information Security. The form to request approval, and relevant guidelines, are available on Gateway [BBC staff only].
Editors should also be aware of any potential impact on the wellbeing of staff who may be exposed to such content for any length of time.
Undercover research
It is possible to conduct more covert research on the internet. The nature of that research could range from simply lurking in open spaces listening unobtrusively to conversations to setting up fake profiles to undertake more serious undercover investigations.
However, deception is only likely to be acceptable when the material could not be obtained by any other means. It should be the minimum necessary, in proportion to the subject matter and the level of public interest involved in the investigation. We should take utmost care not to involve anyone who is not a subject of the investigation in our deception.
Advice should be taken from Editorial Policy before undertaking such an investigation.
Journalists undertaking undercover investigations should also be aware of the risks of being identified by information they may have inadvertently left elsewhere on the web, or even by technical means such as BBC IP addresses. They should ensure that they take appropriate advice at all times.
Artificial Intelligence
Generative AI or AI driven tools are increasingly used for research to gather and analyse information from the internet. They may provide editorial or operational benefits but we should also consider the editorial risks they present, including to our standards of due impartiality and due accuracy.
The level of automation should be appropriate to the editorial significance of the task it is proposed to perform; tasks with considerable editorial impact, such as transcription and data analysis, require careful human oversight. Any use of generative AI or AI driven tools must be actively monitored and outcomes must be further assessed by human editorial oversight before it is employed in BBC content.
(See guidance: Artificial Intelligence)
For guidelines about Artificial Intelligence, including mandatory referrals, see Editorial Guidelines Section 2: Impartiality 2.4.19, Section 3: Accuracy 3.4.27-29, and Section 11: Statistics, Data, Polls and Surveys 11.4.22.
The Dark Web
Any research on the Dark Web should be very carefully considered and only undertaken with senior editorial approval and clear oversight, following advice from Editorial Policy.
Where research on the Dark Web is editorially justified, staff should take particular care of all the security issues that are raised by such activity. Advice is available from the BBC Information Security.