A Single Southern Guy in America

May 15, 2004

The Berg Video and Blogging Ethics

Earlier I wrote about the unprecedented amounts of traffic that many blogs were receiving as a result of the posting, linking, and cross linking of the Berg video. In that missive, I wondered what it meant about us as a people that we would seek out something so horrible in such numbers. The title of it was Brutal Truth Traffic. With more thought, it has occurred to me that it could be meant as either BrutalTruth Traffic or Brutal TruthTraffic. I am unresolved as to which it should be.

Michele ~~has~~ had some thoughts about what it has meant about the bloggers who were amazed and, perhaps, proud, of their surge in traffic.

While I don't think she was referring to my discussions about traffic, in a small way, some of what she had to say could have been rightly applied. My humble little blog was moved to another server due to its increase in traffic and somehow in the process the databases for MT became corrupted, and I lost almost all functionality of my blog save being able to view it. I owe Michele a debt of gratitude for keeping me calm, as I grew more and more frantic about losing the blog and a year's worth of entries. Fortunately, my host, Verve, pointed the DNS back to the original servers and all I lost were a few of my frantic emails to Michele, Dean, and a few others.

Returning to the point, I believe the phenomenon illustrated a great deal about the people who came looking for the video, those who hosted it, those who pointed to it, and those who refused to show the way. In the most basic and primitive sense of web logs, an entry with a hyperlink to another site of interest, the blogosphere fulfilled its initial objectives grandly. However, the blogosphere is much more than that simple objective these days. Blogs provide coverage which the Big Media ignores (like this story or the Lott-Thurmond affair), we provide commentary free from any number of yokes, we serve as an alternative source of news (like what happened after 9/11), and we serve as a guide to any number of newsworthy reports (see the Command Post).

Normally, we serve in these capacities for a relatively small group from among the entire population--the Blogosphere. I define blogosphere here to refer to the bloggers and their regular readers whether those readers have blogs themselves or not. I include those readers because often emails from those readers tip the blogger off to a story or a different point of view. Part of the power of the blogosphere has been that among those regular readers were a number of the mainstream media members. With enough time and enough rancor, it reaches a boiling point and at times the mainstream media will follow our lead and pick up the story. More times than not, the mainstream media will only 'run' with a story that 'has legs.' The blogosphere has often helped a limping story along until it has enough strength to run on its own--all the way to the headlines on papers across the nation.

However, in the Berg event the general google-searching public crashed our quaint little party and procedure of moving a story into the mainstream and in the process knocked several of our sites down. People were seeking more information than what they were allowed by the mainstream media. In the meantime, many initially cried that the Big Media were ignoring the story when that is what people wanted to know about the most. In hindsight, we know that the mainstream media were still on the trail, following leads about Berg's apparently coincidental leak with alleged 20th hijacker, Zacarias Moussaoui. The blogosphere had at least one mention of this link. I saw it shortly after it was posted and within minutes of seeing a brief report of the same on one of the news networks. That post called Berg 'dirty,' an oversight later apologized for by its author.

I've wrestled for sometime about what this event meant about people, bloggers, and the mainstream media. I am still at a loss to know what all of it means. Yet, I have discovered one thing. One of the great strengths of blogs is our ability to quickly link, comment, turn on a dime and correct ourselves, add updates, and generally be much more nimble than the mainstream media. However, this strength has an accompanying danger of communicating errors, falsehoods, and overstating some items. The comments on my posts about the Berg murder have shown me clearly how easy it is for certain folks to run with an absurdity (i.e. the video was faked, the chair berg is seen seated in is the same type as PFC Lynndie England is seen sitting in while at Abu Gharib, the supposed Western voice saying "thy will be done" at the end of the Berg video).

Knowing that danger exists, I it is my sincere conviction that we must be as careful with what we present to the public as we are diligent in fact checking the mainstream media. Our standards are as diverse as the number of blogs. We each decide the content we will present, often in the moments before we left click on a mouse to publish it for all the world to see. Previously, I have kiddinglychided the Instapundit for not retracting a link to the hoax website about Take One For The Country while he is often more than happy to note the need for corrections and retractions from mainstream media outlets (i.e. here). With a blog as widely read as his Instapundit, it has been my feeling for sometime that he should be very careful to what he presents to his audience. In comparison, the Take One For The Country notion is clearly not as consequential as faked photos being published in the Boston Globe or the fake photos of alleged British troops abusing prisoners. Still, the principle is the same.

Perhaps, it is naive to cling to a belief that we in the blogosphere are providers of truth that is not available to the people elsewhere. Whether it is a brutal truth that we offered in the form of the Berg video or a truth in the form of propriety in the case of the Lott-Thurmond affair, increasingly, we are being turned to in greater numbers for the full story. We already knew that members of the mainstream media were trolling blogs for information and tips. Now we are becoming more fully aware that students doing research papers are turning to us as research resources and in some cases as source material.

The Berg video event makes the point clearly to me that all of us who dare to publish a blog should be exceedingly careful about what content we provide for public consumption and equally as vigilant about correcting ourselves as we demand of the mainstream media. The Berg video is the most recent, and arguably the largest, in terms of traffic, event in which the blogosphere provided coverage of a story that the general public wanted and turned to us to get. To be sure, another story will come along and bloggers will be the ones who provide it to the general public.

I only hope that this event has taught us to be very careful with what we publish and to hold ourselves to at least the same standards we demand of Big Media.

A few post scripts before I hit publish~~

Ths is not directed purely at Paul posting from Wizbang. His thoughtful apology covers his initial shot from the hip in my regard. And, Paul, I am also waiting to what else comes out of the story.

I wish Michele had left her post up, but it's her blog and her right. Still, I wish it was still there.

Posted by Adam H at May 15, 2004 11:33 AM ~ Link Cosmos | Trackbacks (0)

Comments

I think you raise several issues that are beyond the scope of the Nick Berg video controversy. The roll of the blogger is exactly what you describe.

Unfortunately, many of my favorite bloggers have recently quit. Most have simply found it takes too much time. A few have had unpleasant experiences, such as harassment and defamation at the hands of what I call "toxic bloggers."

I have been the victim of one of these toxic bloggers and this weekend the defamation and libelous comments that this person has posted about me has reached a level that has made me contemplate throwing in the towel, too.

Traditional journalists have publishers who will protect them from libel, defamation, and copyright infringment. Bloggers don't have this.

What do you do when someone carries out a series of personal attacks on your character and reputation? What do you do when someone induces attacks by others through defamatory statements?

The fact is that anyone can have a blog -- including unstable, malicious people who would never be published by any reputable newspaper or magazine.

I recently sent a letter to Ben and Mena Trott telling them that one way to salvage their recent PR disaster would be to start investing in a legal defense group for bloggers and to develop some kind of reliability rating system -- similar to the feedback system on eBay (but based on journalistic standards).

Healthcare Web sites have HonCode (http://www.hon.ch/) -- it sets ethical standards for health information Web sites. Those that meet the standards are able to display a logo and are listed on their Web site.

Blogs could have a similar code of ethics. That way, people would know that they are aren't visiting a toxic blogger who is writing his posts from the mental ward of a prison.

They'd have to register and provide credentials and verified ID. Other blogs could reject pings from blogs that don't meet ethical standards.

This may seem too restrictive to some. But, without something like this, the blogosphere will collapse in a heap of unethical conduct and lawsuits.

Posted by: Fritz at May 16, 2004 01:10 PM

Fritz, Adam isn't talking about little ol' you here. Go to your own blog to feel sorry for yourself. We don't need further regulation. Regulate yourself, and the problem will cease to exist. Set your own code of ethics.
These blogs are a place where people still have the right to say whatever they want...one of the few places. If you're scared of being attacked, perhaps you should have been a journalist, so you could have been adequately protected by your publishers.
I am glad the link was put up. No, I didn't watch it. I didn't need to watch it to know it was it was a tragic event, to cry for the families loss. I do, however, live in America, and very much enjoy my freedom of speech.
The blogosphere is not going to colapse in lawsuits because most of us aren't whining about being treated badly by fellow bloggers. So stop yer bitchin'! Do something positive for your community.

Sorry, Adam, but that comment just pissed me off. Mondays.

Posted by: rachel at May 17, 2004 10:53 AM

However...I did watch the Nick Berg video, and of course, like most of you, probably had several cross relational ambevilance influencing both a justified and unjustified opinion about what had happened to him. Needless to say, i have been doing research including a range of opinions and ideas as to what happened and why. I'm honest. I still don't have an answer to give. I found a lot of evidence though about people in general regarding their personal religious and political beliefs. Most think, God is their personal employee rather than the other way around. As do most in America who foolishly allow others to do their thinking for them instead of doing the work for themselves think that those employed via their paycheck in goverment structures work for them, "We The People, Of The People, By The People, and For The People" when in actuality, all the crapola we see on tv (By whoevers! nation,,,,) is pure propaganda for the capitalist. Wake up folks, how many brands of detergent, tv's....denin jeans...shampoos....lalalalla, WHAT DO WE REALLY """""NEED"""""? Wants and Needs folks. That all our lives really numerate into. Did we WANT to see the Nick Berg video??? Or....Did we NEED to see it, and WHY? What's the point? What did the deed and seeing the deed realy acomplish? Like me, you are another person with another opinion right? What we NEED is TRUTH. Because truth evolves itself into practical living which everyone in the world can understand and appreciate. So America does impractical things, other countries, and then the terrorist do impracitcal things too.

I do experiments using my own life as a vehicle to find facts. Walking down the street, I have found that psychology boils down to one thing. Is someone wanting my personal power OR wanting to give me some of theirs? Most crimes committed anywhere, have to do with a lack of control or power or both. So why does one want to control another? Because it gives them a sense of power. Temporary as it is, twisted as it is, it gets them through just one more night in their lackful life, until they needs some more power again. We all do this on even a small level if not others, on bigger levels...I guess it all boils down to reason. When I saw the video I tried to make "sense" of it, find reason, which is back to what I said before, "practicality". So let's each one of us, take our own lives, find out what we really need, make sense of it, then find a practical set of disciplines we can follow in an effort to allow destruction to just destroy itself, and allow creation to live on...Peace!

Posted by: Kyte Flyer at May 17, 2004 09:58 PM