Sue Responsibly, Report Responsibly, Blog Responsibly
I am XenoBoy. I am the Political Savant.
Today, I weigh in for my closest confidant in blogosphere, Molly of the Meek. In her latest entry, she cries out for simpler language, a cry oft heard among my many anonymous friends. The CNA report on blogo sacer AcidFlask is cited.
In one line, AcidFlask is said to have criticised A*Star, and by default nomos empsuchon, Phillip Yeo, in his "blogs". I know not AcidFlask has two blogs. A slippage of terms.
Than lawyers are mentioned. Lawyers say to blogosphere : blog "responsibly" or you can be sued. Than Mr Gilbert Leong exerts his stupidity with a hyperbolically symbolic statement peppered with the following conjunctions : "i think ... indeed defamatory ... can actually take ... in other words ... can be sued".
In other words, the CNA article justifies what Phillip Yeo has done. It supports the silencing of a blog. It lays a moral judgement on blogosphere to "blog responsibly". (Note : This summary is for Molly of the Meek)
I am XenoBoy. I am the Political Savant.
I say to the lawyers/defendants in the article. Sue responsibly. You have a Stupid Dumbass Party opposition politician who is sued for defamation. I XenoBoy, understand the politics behind this. You have a "ex-scholar" (read : bond breaker) who is threatened with legal action, I Xenoboy, understand not the politics.
A responsible defamation legal action suit in this general genre of political silencing is one that involves bankrupting opposition politicians. The concomitant irresponsible defamation legal action suit is one that involves bankrupting a cyber-individual's ideas.
I am XenoBoy. I am the Political Savant.
I say to the reporter. Report responsibly. Your report has two phrases which repeat that bloggers "need to understand" and "need to be aware". What I need is for you to report responsibly. A responsible report is one which explains that a blog has a most important other dissimilarity to a pen-paper diary. It allows comments. Feedback.
A responsbile report notes that in blogosphere, the comment function acts as a self regulating mechanism. If Phillip Yeo is fucked in a blog entry, he can defend himself. The entire army of A*Star scholars and staff can defend him. This is the notion of discourse.
I am XenoBoy. I am the Political Savant.
"They're gonna inform the police chief, who'll breathe a sigh of relief .. He'll say I was a malanderer, a badlander, and a thief ... When I go .. They'll bang a big old gong ... the motorcade will be ten miles long .. The world will join together for a farewell song, when they put me down below ... they'll sound a fluegelhorn ... And the sea will rage, and the sky will storm ... all man and beast will mourn ... When I go" -- Nick Cave
posted by xenoboysg at 3:06 AM
5 Comments:
Trackback: From a Singapore Angle, CNA picks up the Acid Flask Affair: Blogosphere Reactions
No, no... Dialogism is no good. Due to certain special circumstances, unilateral feedback in better.
And Molly doesn't like the way you place "Sue Responsibly" and "report responsibly" before "blog responsibly." It's the direct inversion of the order of things.
Xeno
ur injunction to report responsibly and the following excerpt of AcidFlask's nice nice whacking of the dumbass reporter (taken from singabloodypore)
to Valarie, Ng
More options May 5 (5 hours ago)
Dear Ms. Tan:
I am shocked and indignant that in your CNA Article dated May 4, not only had you written an article who stand was far from neutral, you had made at least one glaring factual error that is completelybunbecoming of any news agency.
I will only address here the error that is relevant to me. For the record that I am a first year graduate student in the chemical physics PhD program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA. I am not "pursuing [my] Masters in the States". Given that a quick Google search of my name turns up the correct school and relevant information about my program of study, I cannot believe that you did apparently not even bother to verify such a basic fact about myself before running a story about me.
I mention in passing your errorneous un-compounding of the word "Web Logs" instead of "weblogs", the ambiguous use of the phrase "pull off" and your discourtesy in referring to me by "Chen" and not "Mr. Chen", and other sundry choices of English that have only served to lower my impression of your journalistic standards further.
Perhaps it had not occur to you that your last email was sent at 11pm local time on May 3 (10 am May 4 Singapore time), and that given my examination period begins tomorrow, I was likely that I would be unable to reply to your email in time for your article, especially when you did not mention the urgency of your request? Your colleague Shing Yi had contacted me earlier at about 3 am local time and I had just sent off a reply to her at 11 pm. Since your email came later at 6 am local time, I thought it would be reasonable to assume to reply to you (also at about 11 pm), that by mentioning her contacting me, you would at least have asked her if she had received any reply.
Obviously, this did not happen. While I am aware of time pressures that you may face in compiling news reports, I cannot in any way understand how you have apparently neglected to verify the simple fact of what I was studying here in the United States. It is highly unprofessional of you to have published a falsehood in your mass media, where millions of otherwise innocent viewers have become impressed with wrong information which may serve to affect their impression of the situation at hand. Such actions are tantamount to professional negligence and are highly unbecoming of any journalist from any news agency.
Your preposterous actions have permanently tarnished my impression of ChannelNewsAsia and has significantly lowered my impressions of your journalistic standards. The facts that your errorneous statement was further propagated by your colleague Wong Siew Ying in her own article dated May 5, and that both times such an errorneous statement could have made it through the editorial review process, only serve to reinforce my poor impression of your company.
For the record, here is more or less what I had sent to your colleague Shing Yi. I give you permission to use this information as long as it is reported in a neutral and factually accurate fashion, and subject to the following conditions: that I am not to be quoted directly as making the following points, and that paraphrasing them would be acceptable; that you may mention contacting me as long as it is made clear that I did not solicit the interview, and that my sole purpose in contacting you is purely in the interests of factual accuracy, especially in the light of your errorneous reporting; and that you will apologize either in your personal capacity or as a representative of ChannelNewsAsia for making the errorneous remarks.
If you do not agree to make an apology, then I may be forced to consider legal action.
Trackback: http://convexset.blogspot.com/2005/05/onlinethe-straits-times-amuses-me.html
ST asked for an "interview" at Fri 7pm for a Saturday paper.
Reporting responsibly. Ohhhh yes ... TNP et al is now reifying the great man himself, Phillip Yeo.
Post a Comment
<< Home