More legal news. I'm not sure where I stand on this whole Apple v the rumour sites issue. I read a lot of the rumour sites avidly, and I'm a bit disturbed by Apple's heavy handed approach. But (a little inconsistently for me) I also think they have a point, and that the whole civil liberties and freedom of the press issue is being wrongly played here. (I'm a big advocate of Britain's unwritten constitution - it comes in very handy sometimes, as Charles's engagement to Camilla last week showed!)
Investigative journalism is undeniably essential in matters of public interest, such as crimes or corruption. But stealing a company's secrets is hardly 'in the public interest' - it may be of interest to the public but that's completely different. If a company is developing something that gives it a competitive edge over a rival, well that's interesting. But stealing that secret, or soliciting the stealing of that secret, risks an awful lot - perhaps even people's jobs and livelihoods.
And protecting a criminal is not covered, I would say, by constitutional rights, so this doesn't strike me as a 'protecting sources' thing.
So what about the issue about the status of people who operate these websites as being journalists? That's a tricky one because by that token I am a journalist for writing this blog, as is a woman who might run a site that interviews Osama Bin Laden. I'm protected, she's protected: we're all journalists now...
The Republican and Democratic party conventions last year gave press passes to blog-owners, and Apple's own keynote was covered live by blogs presumably there on press passes, so as far as those organisations are concerened, they are journalists. However in Apple's defence they stopped issuing press credentials to rumour sites a few years ago, if memory serves, so they have some sort of criteria - presumably the law should too. If it's not written in statute then it's up to the courts to rule, and that seems to be what might happen in the case announced today. If the EFF's argument succeeds then I assume I can legitimately put 'journalist' on my passport.
Mind you, considering the standards of some 'real' journalists, I think I'd be stupid to sink so low.
BBC NEWS | Technology | Apple attacked over sources row: "Civil liberties group the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has joined a legal fight between three US online journalists and Apple.
Apple wants the reporters to reveal 20 sources used for stories which leaked information about forthcoming products, including the Mac Mini.
The EFF, representing the reporters, has asked California's Superior court to stop Apple pursuing the sources.
It argues that the journalists are protected by the American constitution.
The EFF says the case threatens the basic freedoms of the press."
Visual Communication: From Theory to Practice
(Winner of 'Best Higher Education Title' at the British Book Awards 2006)
by Jonathan Baldwin and Lucienne Roberts
More Than A Name: An introduction to branding
by Melissa Davis and Jonathan Baldwin
2 comments:
The New York Times just reported (Monday) that a chief news executive at CNN (Eason Jordan) has resigned. This is partially due to conservative bloggers jumping all over a statement he made in Switzerland (a statement which he later clarified).
I think you're right in claiming higher ground as either blogger or journalist. The fact that Jordan is out of a job due to the lynch mob antics of bloggers who are not held accountable for their actions is not good.
I support open-source journalism, but I think there should be some sort of code of conduct.
There've been quite a few like this recently - a weatherman on a local news channel in the states fluffed the words 'martin Luther King Day' to say 'Martin Coon - I mean Luther'.
Anyway someone rang in and he apologised but before long the blogosphere got hold of it and had convicted him of being racist. He later resigned (or maybe was sacked, I can't remember - but, hey, this is a blog so I can make it up, right?)
A friend of his, who is black, wrote an impassioned defence revealing that the weatherman was a long-standing campaigner on race equality etc.
I only frequent blogs that credit their sources, and I try to do the same thing - and if possible I credit the original creditable source (e.g. the BBC or the Guardian).
A student of mine pointed me in the direction of a short video about the breakdown of media credibility - I've been meaning to write about it here for a while so maybe I will tomorrow...
Post a Comment