« RTÉ Live
The 80/20 rule of celebrity reviews »

Blogger code of conduct

The “blogger code of conduct” meme has been bubbling away but is going mainstream with the NYTimes covering it.

Firstly I feel terrible about what happened to Kathy Sierra.

I disagree though that it is a blog phenomena or something that only happens on the internet. Ask any public figure from any age of human history and you’ll hear some awful stories of threats and harassment.

We bloggers are highly arrogant to think we are facing new issues.

I am on the side of anarchy in this. It comes down to the individual how they run their domain. So long as it is legal I don’t want interference from any party. It is the readership that decides what they read.

I don’t see the New York Times putting a badge on their papers stating their affiliations, political leanings, family friendly rating and whether they use the word fuck or not.

Publications that do do this do so for legal reasons. The rest of the world figure out the other publications through context.

I’m not putting some sheriff badge on my blog.

Instead I’ll simply do the best I can to positively contribute to the world. I’ll make mistakes, I’ll get it wrong and I’ll have some moments of dementia but I’ll do my best.

Be human, realise everyone else is human and get on with life.

Back to Kathy. What happened to her is a different issue to this blogger code of conduct. I hope the threats against are treated like any threats in any media; by the law.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 9th, 2007 at 5:39 pm and is filed under Post, blogger code of conduct, conduct, kathy sierra, law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 1 Comment

    • ^
    • v
    > I am on the side of anarchy in this. It comes down to the individual how
    > they run their domain. So long as it is legal I don’t want interference from
    > any party. It is the readership that decides what they read.

    Uh-huh.
    Look, the whole thing's reactionary. Someone got scared by a bunch of assholes, and the "leaders" are looking for some way to wield the power that they don't have so as to avoid being accused of complacency. Meanwhile, all the usual suspects are screaming "censorship!".

    IMHO, all the shrillness just hides the obvious: it's *your* blog, it's *your* site, BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT'S ON IT!

    If you don't mind vulgar comments, then let 'em be - but when someone gets offended, don't loose your backbone: it was your decision to leave 'em open, and you ARE responsible, morally if not legally, for what others posted. This isn't USENET, or an open message board - it's a web page that allows limited kibitzing, nothing more - and you ARE the defacto moderator, and if you choose not to moderate, then you've given your implicit approval to whatever is posted.

    You can make all the comparisons to "Real Life" that you want, but there's only one that's apt: the network TV show. This is Paul Live, Paul Coast-to-Coast, The Paul Show. You may not get to pick the guests, but you sure as hell are responsible for what they do on your stage, and how much of that gets broadcast.

    So don't wear a star. Don't wear a ribbon. Don't posture.
    Just open up that admin page that only you have access to, _and do your damn job_.

Trackbacks

close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus