I’m not sure. I don’t think I’ve ever seen prior restraint being applied against bloggers (or really anyone, for that mater), but I do remember that Xeni complained when the NYT described a blogger as an activist, instead of a journalist.
But if you are usually concerned only with freedom of speech, the blogger-journalist distinction makes no sense. You should really be concerned that everyone—be they bloggers, journalists, or any individual speaking in any context—gets the same freedom of rights speech. It only makes sense to give journalists greater speech powers if you think they provide a special function that private speakers (and perhaps bloggers) do not, which is essentially what you have said above when you suggest journalistic bloggers should receive full protection and non-journalistic bloggers should also receive “many” of the same protections. And it seems very much to me that this distinction is implicit in the way you guys typically talk about freedom of speech and bloggers, as though there are meaningful differences between journalists and non-journalists. (For the record, I believe that US law does, in fact, treat all speakers the same; whether one is a journalist or not is irrelevant for free speech purposes.)
I apologize. Journalists or not, I had always been under the naive belief that Boing Boing was a website that told the truth about events that are happening in the world.
I now understand that this is not the case, so I will continue to read Boing Boing only for entertainment purposes, as I do The Onion.
Also, journalists or not, making libelous statements about the Russian government is NOT cool because it gives the Russian government ammo to paint all of the criticism that it receives as a bunch of lies.
…or instead of maniacally swinging from one far extreme to the other, you could rather take a sane approach and enjoy it for exactly what it is. An editorial blog/zine that covers topics relevant to tech, maker, and “the weird, wonderful and wicked things to be found in technology and culture.” http://boingboing.net/about
It is neither a spoof site like the Onion, nor is it the strictly serious NYT. We are all here to have fun and discuss the topics relevant to us and our collective culture. I suggest enjoying the site for what it is, rather then letting some personal butthurt from the comments or a title cause you to pendulum further and further to ridiculous extremes. Cheers.
The site’s writers/editors are career journalists who have contributed to the New York Times, Washington Post, Wired, Scientific American, NPR, CNN, and many other news outlets.
Cory’s Bio, in particular, begins:
Cory is a science fiction author, activist, journalist and blogger, the author of Tor Teens/HarperCollins UK novels like FOR THE WIN and the bestselling LITTLE BROTHER.
I am not being “maniacal” (perhaps you mean "manic?) You either trust the information on a website or you do not. I misunderstood what this site was and assumed that the information here was trustworthy. And for information to be trustworthy, it has to be consistently trustworthy.
I have no problem with enjoying the site for what it is, but when it comes to evaluating the truthfulness of information on this site, I have no choice but to treat it like the information on the Onion. It is either a matter of “we promise never to tell blatant lies” or “we sometimes tell blatant lies, but don’t worry about it.”
Sites like Wonkette make it very clear what they are doing and that makes it fun. With Boing Boing, it’s sometimes hard to tell.
I always use my own discernment with any information, from a respected news site or other. Shows like “The Daily Show” or “The Colbert Report” must drive you batsh*t if you don’t like your news mixed in with humor and commentary and opinion.
Sorry if my above comment was so unclear that you missed the point, all I was trying to say is that you’ll enjoy this site a lot more if you chill-the-f-out, and that jumping from one extreme to the other is just plain crazy. Yes Boing Boing covers news on this site, but it also contains opinions, humor, and much more, similar to the previously mentioned “news” shows. If you want more information, click through to the source link which is always handily provided so that you can determine for yourself how literally to take a piece. Grouping this site with a strictly satirical site like the Onion, is just as nuts as getting all bent out of shape over an articles title that doesn’t meet your personal journalistic expectations. That’s my opinion, you can take it or leave it for whatever it is worth. Cheers.
Fair enough. The headline here was clearly intended to be a joke and not some kind of statement of fact. I still maintain that it wasn’t a very funny joke, though.
