Well, as the astute reader may have noticed, "The Bytewriter" took an extended leave of absence. The circumstances, I would hope, are understandable.

At the end of April, I became the managing editor of The Convergence—Canada's first daily online magazine about the new media. I've spent the last few months fine tuning the magazine, but am now back, ready to write.

As "The Bytewriter" aims to cover the intricacies of online journalism, and, for next few columns I'll be discussing journalistic ethics in the new media.

Over the past few decades, the journalism industry has a basic set of guidelines. Yes, some of the finer points are still debated, but there is a recognizable code of conduct:

• Don't use the medium for personal vendettas
• Ensure balance and fairness when reporting
• Declare bias up front, and avoid conflicts of interest

These rules should be carried across to new media journalism, and in most cases they are. On July 2, 1997, the American Society of Magazine Editors established guidelines to encourage the transition. (The ASME does not appear to have a Web site, so the guidelines are taken from various news sources, like NEWS.COM and Wired News.) Many of their recommendations, which dealt with specifically with advertising, old media journalists would recognize:

• Clearly define advertising as such
• No ads on the table of contents
• Clearly brand the site with the publications name and logo

A notable addition addresses the issue of advetorial sites. The ASME recommends that Web sites clearly brand such areas as "Special Advertising Section" so that readers can differentiate between ads and journalistic content.

It is tempting in the online world, where advertising is rarer than a Canadian magazine in the U.S., to let advertisers "sponsor" editorial content:

Like old media, new media needs to be aware of where the ads are being placed in relation to the content. That's why many Web sites, like Salon, Feed and Hotwired, have placed their ads in a separate frame at the bottom of the screen.

These are little steps to keep editorial content "clean" from potential conflicts with advertising. While such guidelines should be commended, they are only suggestions. Worse yet, corporate-commercial sites like, for example, Microsoft and Netscape carry "news" and columns that could be hard to distinguish from news produced as journalism.

To Microsoft's credit it has managed to maintain the appearance of editorial coverage independent of the software giants PR department(s) on its other sites. Slate is a well-written and edited online magazine that has remained, to the best of my knowledge advetorial-free. As has MSNBC, although, its placement of ads is questionable. This ad:

was placed in the middle of the news page. And though the online city guides called Sidewalk are controlled/restrained by their owners, the same could be said for the Southam papers.

Because of the (unspoken) desire to become reputable publications akin to the New Yorker or the Wall Street Journal, many in new media are making great efforts to remain editorially "clean." But as software and hardware companies continue to buy into and take-over "content-producing" Web sites, those ethics might become too troublesome for the Conrad Blacks and Ruport Murdochs of new media.

In two weeks The Bytewriter will tackle the dangers, and benefits, of hyperlinks