Should the ethics of giving sources their due credit be different online compared to in print?
Arguably, they should not. Nevertheless, two stories seem to indicate that bad habits might be spreading.

The Press Complaints Commission has published new guidlines for news publications on the prominence they should give to corrections, clarifications and apologies online, Journalism.co.uk reported.

The PCC deals with complaints raised by readers about editorial content of UK newspapers and magazine, both in their print and online editions. Complaints are investigated under the Editors' Code of Practice and when a breach of Code is found, PCC main aim is to find a negotiation for a satisfactory complaint's resolution.

The PCC states that "if the Commission concludes that the Code has been breached (and the breach has not - or cannot - be remedied) it will uphold your complaint in a public ruling. The newspaper or magazine is obliged to publish the critical ruling in full and with due prominence".

While defined are the rules for the due prominence publication in print - over 80% of texts negotiated through the PCC appear on the same page as, or on an earlier page, than the original article, or in a designated corrections column - online publication has still not been clear. The new guidance goes in this direction of clarification.

"So once again, we see that Twitter is generally the sounding board for true idiots," writes Christian Blood, contributor for Bleacher Report. The Green Bay Packers defeated the Chicago Bears 21-14 in Sunday's NFC Championship Game, advancing to Superbowl XLV against the Pittsburgh Steelers, scheduled for Feb. 6 at Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas. But people aren't focusing on the Packers' win or the upcoming Superbowl, no, they're talking about Bears quarterback Jay Cutler's injury and the bombardment of Twitter insults that followed.

Athletes and professional media have had a long history of working together to act as the sole source of sports news. Recall the famous 1961 MLB season during which New York Yankees Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris raced to beat Babe Ruth's elusive, almost holy, 60 home run single-season record (set in 1927). Mantle, a charismatic Yankee veteran was open to the press, whereas small-town North Dakota native Maris, who was new to the overwhelming limelight of New York City, was soft-spoken around reporters. Consequently, the press painted Mantle as the hero, and Maris, who went on to hit 61 home runs that season to break Ruth's record, as the villain. Reporters asked questions, players answered (or didn't), reporters wrote newspaper articles, fans read the articles and formulated their opinions - that was how sports journalism worked.

A roiling debate continues in Britain as to whether council-run newspapers should be curbed through revision of legal code due to their alleged negative impact on commercial papers.

According to Roy Greenslade's blog in The Guardian, a Commons Committee rejected a plan submitted by Communities Minister Eric Pickles aiming to do just this, on the grounds that "the committee accuses the minister of failing to provide proof that council-run papers threaten commercial newspapers."

The proposed new code would limit local authorities to publishing council-run papers only once a quarter. Pickles summarizes that "propaganda dressed up as journalism not only wastes money but undermines a free press and a healthy democracy."

But "'much stronger evidence is required' to justify such restriction," thinks the Committee.

Members of Parliament consider a specified maximum frequency of council-run papers to be unnecessary, according to Greenslade, stating that before a new code is presented to Parliament, they ask Pickles to "commission an independent review to assess competition in the local media market and quantify the impact of council publications on commercial entities operating in their locale."