You are being watched...Careful what you publish!This bit of advice is dedicated especially to Mr Scott Waldman, "hill-town" reporter for the Times Union, Albany, New York, a newspaper of the Hearst Corporation and to Mr Richard Davey Benham and Mr Scott Horne, known Internet troll and sockpuppet, respectively.
Research and truthful information has been a hot discussion topic on this blog and there are many opportunities to do good research to gather useful intelligence and reliable information. There are also myriad opportunities to make a monumental fool out of one's self if one is not careful and prudent in how one uses the available information.
First of all, it's important not to take just any information just because it looks good and because it fits your argument. There are a lot of lunatics, persons with axes to grind, perverts on the web who are just waiting for the opportunity to find a willing listener. Don't get baited and trapped. (See our discussions on Internet trolls and sockpuppets below.)
Just because some character comes up with a "press kit" or a compilation of documents and offers them as proof doesn't make them evidence. Take the context of the so-called evidence. Evaluate it with a clear mind. What does it show? Is the party offering it credible or is his credibility tainted? Check up on all parties. Check the evidence. Check you sources! (Lesson to be learnt from Mr Benham and Mr Horne. Also, Joan Ross and John Luckacovic , defendants in the lawsuit for libel now calendared for trial, would have fared much better had they checked their sources.)
All arguments have an alternative interpretation; just because a troll or a sockpuppet belches up several lines of stilted eloquence doesn't make him credible. Use your brain when reading something on the Internet and make your own decisions!
Careful and currency start with "C". So do "civil complaint", "criminal complaint", claim, conspiracy and just plain crapola (Yes, Mable. It's in the dictionary). But think also "cache" [French, from cacher, to hide]. You may think you deleted some document years ago and there it is again! How'd that happen? Well, search engines like Google store millions of old, supposedly deleted documents in what is called a cache. A cache is something like a hiding place for Internet content. What you thought was gone forever just might get resurrected and whether you made every effort to correct a situation, there's a pervert out there who may get lucky and find that photo or document. The best rule, then, is to delete from cache when deleting anything. Or, even better, if you have any doubts just don't post it.
Good research doesn't happen overnight. Any time you think you have gotten lucky and have everything you need in the first hours or days of research. Think again. Remember the saying, "Keep it simple, stupid"? Think, "It's too simple, stupid." And check and recheck. That will keep you out of hot water.
Internet abusers, defamers, Internet trolls, sockpuppets have all had their fun but now their sins are catching up on them. The Internet is rife with evil creatures who have done great damage in the past and are still plying their scatological nonsense on the web. But a simple web search of such terms as "Internet abuse", "Internet defamation", "Internet libel", "Internet law" will return literally hundreds of hits relating to changing views, public and legal, with respect to what and how something is said on the Internet. There have been many cases in many countries applying the law of defamation in many ways to many defendants. The common denominator is that Internet defamation is no longer tolerated and big damage awards are being handed down by courts and by juries.
There are also many good online reference sources on the Internet to guide you in your libel-proof writing. Because I frequently make contributions to newspapers and post a lot on Internet I have collected an assortment of guides and manuals. One of those which I frequently consult is the New York Times manual Ethical Journalism: A Handbook of Values and Practices for the News and Editorial Departments (2004) (http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/04/the-guidelines-on-our-integrity-from-1999-are-worth-a-look/). See also The Newsroom Integrity Statement, promulgated in 1999 (http://nytco.com/company/business_units/integrity.html), which deals with such rudimentary professional practices as the importance of checking facts, the exactness of quotations, the integrity of photographs and our distaste for anonymous sourcing. The New York Bar Association's handbook for journalists, Legal Handbook
For New York State Journalists (2004), Published by the New York State Bar Association with the cooperation of the New York Newspaper Publishers Association, Inc. is also a very informative guide and should be within the reach of any credible and well informed journalist (Right, Mr Waldman?).
In brief: Be smart and keep your credibility and your good name; do good research, comply with the established guidelines when publishing anything, keep abreast of developments in the law and check your facts thorougly.
0 comments:
Post a Comment