Blogging the Code
On April 9, 2007, no less a bastion of all that is newsworthy than The New York Times published an article by Brad Stone in its Technology section promoting the idea of issuing various "seals of approval" for bloggers who abide one or another "Code of Conduct" on their Weblogs. This quality grading system is the brainchild of a promoter, Tim O'Reilly, and the creator of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales.With such a cast of luminaries leading the charge to determine and enforce "civil behavior online," resistance might seem, at first blush, simply futile.
As a point of terminology, it should be noted that the word "conduct" is not quite appropriate: "conduct" and "speech" are distinct acts in law. Private speech is broadly protected under the Constitution, and its commercial cousin is also protected, although not quite as broadly. Conduct, while sometimes difficult to distinguish from pure speech, does not have such blanket immunity from control by the government. It would appear, by virtue of the obvious fact that the Blogosphere is principally a venue for speech, that what this new push for civility is offering is not a "Code of Conduct," but instead a "Code of Speech." That doesn't sound quite so benign.
But that's nothing more than semantics, and we all know that precision in word usage is, like good English grammar, just so old-fashioned, so let us move on to more worthy topics.
To begin, I might, in my typical modesty of commentary, point out that The New York Times—that civility-minded, monolithic institutional bulwark of East Coast Liberal Media elitism—has not yet found within its editorial intestines the wherewithal to finally, once and for all and without a shred of self-defense, apologize for being the information mule for the propaganda machine that brought about the American-Iraqi War that is now in its fifth year. This, by the way, is the war that has turned just about the entire world against us; it is the war that has turned budget surpluses at the end of the Clinton Administration into hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in federal budget deficits that have made us a pathetic debtor nation to every manner of wretch from mercantilist-Communist Chinese thugs to smirking, two-faced Saudi game-players; it is the war that has turned a savage, little band of murderous, criminal maniacs into a world-wide army of savage, murderous, criminal maniacs; and it is the war that has debilitated our military to such an extent that, for perhaps the first time in modern American history, we are not only incapable of projecting war-level force where necessary on the globe, but we might not be able to defend even our own homeland (unless, of course, it is from our own citizens who might oppose the President).
Yes, it is The New York Times that now promotes the idea of civility in the Blogosphere. Having gingerly purged itself of a reporter who used the front page of the rag to make it look like independent investigative journalism was uncovering the same facts as were being claimed by other promoters of a worthless, irrelevant war, The New York Times now features a call to civility in the Blogosphere. Having deliberately, knowingly silenced other journalists at the paper who were trying to warn that the drumbeat to war was a lie, The New York Times now features a call to civility in the Blogosphere. Having admitted that it was sharing pre-publication news story with the Washington Post, which then made it look like the "information" about Saddam Hussein's mythical weapons of mass destruction was coming from multiple, independent, private sources, The New York Times now calls for civility in the Blogosphere. And having finally gotten so busted by the actual facts on the ground, which revealed the so-called "journalist" as a liar (and, to some extent, added fuel to the rumors that she had for years been an asset of a foreign intelligence service), The New York Times now calls for civility in the Blogosphere.
Well, goodness. Right there, with The New York Times on board, it looks like a slam dunk.
To be honest, I really don't know anything about the A-listers who are vaunting themselves with their little seals of approval. I can say that I am impressed by that Tim O'Reilly fellow, whose subdomain, radar.oreilly.com, seems to show his familiarity with the boundaries of the so-called fair use doctrine or perhaps the Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music [(92-1292), 510 U.S. 569 (1994)] Supreme Court decision, what with the association he's making between himself and the famed character Radar O'Reilly in the movie and television series, M*A*S*H. I can also say that I have to bring up Jimmy Wales, not by name but rather by his Wikipedia site, at least several times every semester when I counsel (actually, when I roar at) students who are under the misimpression that they can use Wikipedia as a legitimate citation in a college-level term paper.
It's all just enough to take a blogger's breath away. And then The New York Times trots out some blogging group called BlogHer as a paragon of civility, what with the principals' stated policy of deleting inappropriate comments, which is apparently an act of civility. In the context of representing comment deletion as something other than censorship, we get a quote from that promoter, Mr. O'Reilly: "[It] is one of the mistakes a lot of people make — believing that uncensored speech is the most free, when in fact, managed civil dialogue is actually the freer speech... Free speech is enhanced by civility."
Yes, down really is up.
But, of course, the one-track not-really-dialogue wouldn't be complete without using the victim of a real, awful (and on-going) crime: Kathy Sierra, a technology writer, has been plagued by a sicko bent on wrecking her life for no apparent reason other than that she's a woman who had the gall to make herself a public figure by publishing online content. Even Ms. Sierra, herself, states that the matter is being investigated—and, we should hope, dealt with—by law enforcement authorities, although it is most troubling that "local" police are handling the case, when what is happening to her is almost assuredly a federal matter that should be addressed and resolved with brutal efficiency by the FBI.
The cyberviolence being committed against Ms. Sierra—and no less against other women, like Melissa McEwan of Shakesville—has nothing whatsoever to do with "civility" in the Blogosphere. It is way on the other side of a line between nasty commenters on blogs and criminal acts. It is a case study in how far behind and completely clueless about the Internet our legislatures, justice system, and law enforcement mechanisms are. Police departments all around the country show off how with it they are by getting newspapers to run stories about police investigators posing online as tempting little girls, and the media eat this up as proof positive that the cops are on the cyberbeat. No, they're not, not when people like Kathy Sierra are being terrorized by dangerous predators who operate with impunity and anonymity, and not when women like Melissa McEwan are being terrorized by religious hate-thugs who actually appear without fear of arrest on television.
And while we're at it, where's the civility in the Julie Amero case, the one about the substitute teacher who had a computer in her classroom suddenly go into porn pop-up overdrive, probably because a couple of little snots in her class (who didn't have the guts to admit what they had been doing) were surfing naughty-little-boy sites before she got to the class. Ms. Amero, having been convicted by an ignoramus jury, an incompetent judge, and a vicious prosecutor, is facing 40 years in prison for corrupting the tender, virginal youth under her temporary care. (O! the horror of 12-year-olds seeing porn for the very first time in their otherwise innocent, unworldly lives!) Where's the civility? Will Messrs. O'Reilly and Wales be giving The New York Times CyberCivility Badge to the people who, in the on-going quest for the Righteous Web, have wrecked Ms. Amero's life?
The point of that diversion is that "civility" is not the biggest issue vexing the Web. We have major problems that are not being even so much as recognized by the mainstream media, the anointed Internet gurus, the legislatures, and the courts. Instead, we have promoters pushing this new gadget, that new seal of approval, and some other great enforcement hype that erodes privacy while doing nothing about the real pools of personal destruction.
For my own part, I can deal with trolls. Not only do I ban them when they cross a line that I, as the editor and publisher, understand quite clearly, I send them packing with one of my famous, belt-to-the-butt-cheeks lectures. On the other hand, I really could use some help dealing with the mess of commercial spambots; and I could use some aggressive laws to help lame, we-can't-do-nuthin' backbone servers understand their role in choking off DDoS attackers and IP flippers. The problem, of course, is that the federal government has become an enormous, growing threat to my privacy, and it is quite likely that any effort the government would make in pretending to get anonymous attackers into jails would actually be to the end of getting me fully under surveillance, just in case I went all subversive or something.
On the other hand, the cry for "self-policing" embedded in this new "code of conduct" smells suspiciously like the very same whine that persistently pours out with the crocodile tears from overburdened corporations that want to run amok without government regulators to worry about having to abide, bribe, or otherwise control through elections of the appropriate types of Presidents and Congressmen.
Solutions do exist. They really do, and I could offer some; but I won't, not now, anyway. The situation isn't quite bad enough yet, and far too many people, even bloggers, honestly believe that a systematic, deep solution isn't necessary since a solution requires a substantive problem. Even those who honestly say, for example, that the government is watching everything we do on the Web don't believe it enough, or don't see it as sufficiently dangerous, to require extraordinary measures. Even those who believe that entrapment is outrageous cheer every time some law enforcement group trots out their latest sting that nailed a bunch of miserable pervs who never actually chatted online with anyone other than cops posing as tarts. And even a few bloggers who have had annoying trolls slither onto their sites do not understand the difference between a whiney, garden-variety, Right-wing or Leftist windbag and the kind of deranged criminal who writes death- and rape-threat e-mail messages.
For the time being, I can take care of myself out here on the Web. As such, I shall, in the spirit of civility so lacking in this harsh, modern world simply advise Messrs. O'Reilly and Wales, together with their new buddy, The New York Times, that they can bite me.
Having done so, they can then, at their earliest and most frequent convenience, take their seals of approval and stick them up their self-anointed asses.
The Dark Wraith has spoken.
Have your own official Dark Wraith Blogging Code of Conduct Seal of Approval: Click here for the transparent dark background graphic or here for the transparent light background version.
Comments
Wrote Wild Clover:
Wrote oldwhitelady:
Good morning, Dark Wraith.
Good post. It makes me wonder if The New York Times now calls for civility in the Blogosphere.?
I realize it's no laughing matter, but I enjoyed reading that line so much, I could read it again. :)
Good graphic, too. It's quite explicit.
...and I couldn't agree more.
Wrote Eric A Hopp:
Dark Wraith:
May I point out this wonderful little detail in the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/technology/09blog.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&bl&ei=5087%0A&en=93f42e6db12be13b&ex=1176350400&oref=slogin">NY Times story:</a>
<em>Mr. O’Reilly and Mr. Wales talk about creating several sets of guidelines for conduct and seals of approval represented by logos. For example, anonymous writing might be acceptable in one set; in another, it would be discouraged. Under a third set of guidelines, bloggers would pledge to get a second source for any gossip or breaking news they write about.
Bloggers could then pick a set of principles and post the corresponding badge on their page, to indicate to readers what kind of behavior and dialogue they will engage in and tolerate. The whole system would be voluntary, relying on the community to police itself. </em>
Voluntary may ass! I'm sorry, but these whole sets of guidelines and seals of approval are set up for one big colossal failure. The real guideline on how well a blog is doing is how many readers will go to that blog to read the postings. Those blogs that contain good writing and analysis will attract a readership and a following. Does that mean that the most popular blogs are always the best? Of course not--there is plenty of both good writing and crap on the big popular blogs such as the liberal DKos and even the conservative Free Republic. The best thing to do is leave the blogosphere the way it is now, and let the masses decide for themselves what their seals of approval are, who they wish to read, whatever issue they wish to write, and which comments they choose to delete on their own blogs.
Wrote Eric A Hopp:
I think I'm going to have to learn this BBCode here. Damn! Got so use to the old, obsolete, HTML stuff. Now I've got to learn this stuff?
I'm just waiting for the day when DOS WILL RISE AGAIN!
Wrote PoliShifter:
It's all bullshit.
I don't know if you heard about the "blogger amnesty day" that Atrios et al "A lister" bloggers declared a while back.
Basically they deleted all their blog rolls and started "fresh" only adding those blogs that they "really read".
The net result is a higher ranking for them, even more traffic, and thus more ad dollars.
Thus I pulled Atrios's link from my blog...I still check out his site from time to time but I just don't link to it.
This whole "blogger ethics" is bullshit.
This seal of approval thing will quickly turn into a scam where one has to pay lots of money to get "certified". The review panel will likely be biased toward a certain class of blogs AND there will likely be the power of censorship and oversite.
These A List bloggers will likely have to think twice before letting the snark fly and dropping the F bomb or going after certain political targets lest the "blogger certifying board" disapprove of their content and pull their "approval" for their blog.
I think what's going on is the old media establishment is truly threatened by bloggers in one sense over traffic and ad dollars.
Shit Atrios, C&L and other A-List bloggers get $4000+ a week for an ad on their sites.
Now, big media still has the bucks to do great investigations and go to court over FOIA requests...something lowly bloggers can't really do so well.
But, big media also cheats just like everyone else. Nearly all news comes from either AP, Reuters, UPI, BBC, Knightridder, and maybe a couple more I have forgotten.
Each media outlet slaps their own ads and format on these newswire stories and reports them as their own.
Bloggers do the same.
Big media also now is full of OpEd commentary, something bloggers excel at possibly even exceed big media in because bloggers (individuals who run their own sites) don't have to cowtow to anyone.
I think this whole approval business is about trying to take bloggers down a notch because media fears as time goes on they are going to keep losing market share to bloggers.
Secondly, no one fucking cares for the stuffy ass attitudes of these dinosaur papers anymore. The old generation is dying in droves. The younger generation is taking over. It's called life.
Truth is that newspapers and bloggers need each other and should be able to coexist in a symbiotic relationship.
Sure they'll get a few A-listers to agree to a certain "code of conduct" but it won't stop Americans from checking out the myraids of Z-list bloggers such as myself.
Wrote Candy Schultz:
The FBI is too busy checking for terrorists under the kids' desks to help with any domestic crime.
Have you also heard that a segment of academia, with governmental blessings, want to scrap the entire internet and start over? Surveillance would undoubtedly have something to do with that.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good evening, Candy Schultz.
There will be no need to re-invent the Internet. The entire push for strict compliance with W3C standards will have the consequence of making content on Web pages extraordinarily easy at unimaginably vast scale to aggregate, analyze, categorize, and assess for threats.
Does that sound like conspiracy theory paranoia? As I've noted in comments before, W3C conference presenters include some really creepy academics who get grants from the NSA. The mathematical algorithms for teasing out associations, relationships, and linkages between and among people are the stuff of what used to be silly science fiction. Whether or not their algorihms yield valid degrees of separation is another matter, but that is, at least to those desperately seeking a model for threat matrix construction, just about irrelevant, at least in the first decades of deployment of a usable threat assessment framework and toolbox.
Science fiction is always fun to read. It unfortunately and all too often becomes something considerably other than fun when it turns into reality.
The Dark Wraith often wishes we had never emerged from the caves of long ago.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good evening, PoliShifter.
Yes, we'll do okay in this new world, even if the search engines start blocking us. We will adapt. The most important part of immunizing ourselves to what the mainstream media, the A-listers, and the giant search engine/emerging cybermonopolists can do is to keep our blogrolls dense and our references to one another fresh.
That sidebar of mine has never, to my knowledge, had an A-lister on it, other than the close-ins at Shakesville and Pam's House Blend. I don't blogroll just because some diffuse herd mentality informs me that I must put some "important" blog in my list; I link on other criteria, and I m proud of that list of mine in the right column.
As Dark Wraith Publishing grows, those blogs over there the survivors, anyway) will come with me, and the real Blogosphere 2.0, of which I will be a part, won't have a whole lot of blogs even mentioning those A-listers of the obsolete, antiquated Blogosphere 1.0.
Whether the dinosaurs died out from disease, from a meteor blast, or from bad nutrition (referring to that theory that lack of proper vegetation killed them off through constipation), it all has to do with vulnerability and robustness to the vicissitudes of an environment that can change all too rapidly.
The small can keep moving forward, whether it be in the face of ravaging viruses, blistering Hell from the heavens, or concrete, eye-crossing stool.
...Wait a minute... I lost my train of thought. For some reason, this comment is making me want to find some roughage.
The Dark WraIth lost his focus in the heat of an expository sidetrack.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good evening, Eric.
I don't suppose you would be surprised if I told you I actually have a partition on my hard drive that runs Novell DOS 7.
You should see what a DOS machine can do with duo-core and 2 Gigs of RAM.
The Dark Wraith sometimes likes to see what computing at the speed of light really looks like.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good evening, Old White Lady.
I am hopeful that, by getting my sidebar versions of my Blogging Code of Conduct Seal of Approval deployed so quickly, bloggers will know that they have an alternative to those that The New York Times has blessed.
In my considered and objective judgment, "Bite Me" says it all.
The Dark Wraith goes for the simple but effective message.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good evening Wild Clover.
You'll be getting another little mail package from me in a couple of weeks... provided, that is, you remind me via e-mail of what your surname is, rather than leaving me to try using Imp's again.
The Dark Wraith can't remember names worth a darned now that serious age-related memory issues are beginning to nip at his neurons.
Wrote roger:
good morning dw,
nice logo. and nice rant. maybe the newspapers are dying of constipation.
we don't put links to the big blogs on ours. everyone knows who they are. our blogroll is (not quite up to date) for the smaller blogs we like. yes, i consider you one of the biggies.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
The Dark Wraith wonders how roger could possibly have known that.
Wrote rcg:
Great rant, and impeccable logic, as always. I will put that great logo on my blog, later tonight. btw, where is the permalink? I couldn't find it and wanted to shout your logo and post on shoutwire.com.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good afternoon, rcg.
The permalink to the article is this:
http://dark-wraith.com/index.php?itemid=12
(Permanent links are embedded in the date stamp in the post footers. It's an old--and probably not very good--trick to reduce line length.)
The permalink to the logos, by the way, are here:
White background large, 500x550
http://dark-wraith.com/images/BiteMe2w.png
White background medium, 250x275
http://dark-wraith.com/images/BiteMe2w.png
White background small (transparent), 150x165
http://dark-wraith.com/images/sealw.png
Black background large, 500x550
http://dark-wraith.com/images/BiteMe2b.png
Black background medium, 250x275
http://dark-wraith.com/images/BiteMe2w.png
Black background small (transparent), 150x165
http://dark-wraith.com/images/BiteMe2b1.png
The Dark Wraith delivers all the popular sizes and colors.
Wrote trog69:
Good afternoon, DW.
Some of the contestants here may have heard of Fark.com. I have become enslaved to this site, to the point where I have been a TotalFarker for almost 3 years. If you're not familiar with Fark, the site consists of people putting up news items from around the world, the catch being that you can change the headline to just about anything you want, in essence, attempting to trick others into a certain mindset, then snatching the rug out from under them. They also have professional quality photoshop contests that often are hilarious and mindblowing. I usually can be found lurking in the political forums causing as much mayhem as I deem necessary. The reason I mention this here is one of my pet peeves. In the political forums, everybody agrees with each other way, way too much. Naw, just kiddin', it's kill or be killed, just the way I like it.( Coming to The Dark Wraith's lair is relatively quiet time.) On more than one occasion I have come to the defense of some pretty obnoxious Bush administration apologists. Anyone foolish enough to tell them to quit posting their crap, ad hominim attacks, or anything resembling "STFU!" will surely face my wrath. I don't need the choir, nor the same mental Muzak played over and over. I can handle any person's position. I guarantee I won't agree with most people on everything, and I have trolled (ever so gently) just to hear a response different from mine. They have an option where you can place someone on IGNORE and never see their comments again. I have never even considered using this option, because if someone was so threatening that I would ignore their comments, I would instead report them to the authorities.
And to answer that one comment someone almost posted; no I not the Mother of all Farkers!
Wrote Dark Wraith:
Good evening, trog69.
I visit Fark.com every few days. I usually jump there from the Fark link at Pravda.
And by the way, did you hear the one about the two policemen talking to one another?
------------------
Policeman 1: Yep, the suspect attacked his own mom.
Policeman 2: With a knife?
Policeman 1: No, as a matter of fact, he stabbed her with a fork.
Policeman 2: Wow! What'd he do then?
Policeman 1: Well, you won't believe it, but when the police arrived, he punched every one of them in the face.
Policeman 2: My God! The guy was a real cop-socking mother-forker!
Policeman 1: I guess you could say that.
-------------
The Dark Wraith will lay off the jokes, now.
Wrote SBGypsy:
Good Afternoon Dark Wraith,
Love the Biteme graphic.
You should see what a DOS machine can do with duo-core and 2 Gigs of RAM.
The Dark Wraith sometimes likes to see what computing at the speed of light really looks like.
I have my database in old software called DataEase, a Dos program. It's not only slick, it's like greased lightning in an XP machine. It just cannot handle daylight savings time.
Wrote Dark Wraith:
DataEased, SBGypsy?!
Let's talk dBase IV.
The Dark Wraith still remembers (and has) the classics.
Wrote Blondesense:
oh lordy. I'm on a PC this week as i am out of town. I don't understand all this PC talk. I can't wait to get home to my sweet sweet Apple computer.
And yes, the blogger police can fucking bite me.
Add Comments
Log in
Become a Registered Commenter
« Return to the main page.
This blog offers Internet travelers a place where they can discuss economics, finance, politics, and other topics of scholarly and practical interest to thinking people. Your comments are always welcome, and your visits are most appreciated.
Your host of this Weblog is an award-winning college teacher and writer who specializes in economics, finance, mathematics, business administration, computer hardware and software skills, and English grammar and composition. His extensive writings on the history of the English language appeared on About.com in the avatar of the Selig Wraith in the 
Send a Secure Message to the Dark Wraith
![[Valid RSS]](http://dark-wraith.com/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
Here here!