Thinking Ethics

Labor Union for Bloggers?

Very strange article  (the subject not the writing) in the Washington Post by Ashley M. Heher  entitled "Bloggers consider forming labor Union". The main advantage seems to be that they would like medical coverage. This should not be the main reason for joining a union - it should be solved in a different way - like state health insurance if you are European, or some solution that might be brought about in the US (at least everybody is talking about it since the film Sicko came out). Unions help to negotiate better labor conditions for a specific group of people - and since most bloggers are doing this for themselves, exactly who would the union be negotiating against ?

Sticks and stones...

can break my bones - but words will never hurt me. Not quite - intimidation on the net is leading to many women bloggers either stepping out or using self-censorship. Factual article in the New York Times by Ellen Nakashima here. Apparently, the number of people in chat rooms has declined due to women leaving them in droves. Is this incivility a sign of the times, or more gender specific? Studies on mail received by politicians in France show that women receive more aggressive, abusive letter than their mail counterparts, so it looks like there is a factor of gender. We need to get concensus on the codes of conduct, so that this abusive behavior will be condemned and contained. Anonimity on the web does not help - it allows people to hide and indulge in behavior they would never do in front of others.  I would be for total transparency and discredit anybody who does not step up and stand up for his ideas.

Reaction to the draft of the bloggers code of conduct

The trolls are on the move... incredible noise level about the proposed draft of the bloggers code of conduct - requiring a minimum of civility in comments posted on blogs. Good article in the Guardian on the reactions. In case you missed the beginning, some people are saying that it is right to delete offensive and abusive comments. Unacceptable material would be comments used to abuse, harass, stalk or threaten others, is libellous or misrepresentative, infringes copyright, confidentiality or privacy rights. There is also some debate about anonymous postings.

Bloggers Code of Conduct - at last!

There is an expression in French that says that my liberty ends where the liberty of others begin. And I, and many other people, are getting fed up with the abuse we see online in the name of free speech. It's like responsibility with no accountability. So at last we now have a discussion going on a draft of a bloggers code of conduct. The draft was posted by Tim O'Reilly on his site and can be accessed here. He claims it is based on the BlogHer Community Guidelines. If you want to contribute to the discussion the wiki based preview can be accessed here.

Full article on the why and how by Brad Stone in the New York Times "A Call for Manners in the World of Nasty Blogs".

Ethics of blogging

Interesting commentary in Ethics Newsline of Global Ethics entitled "Questions About Blogging Chart New Ethical Territory in Cyberspace". Besides the commentary there are links to the original articles on blogging for dollars - or should we say "sponsored posts", and the pros and cons of district attorneys and doctors blogging on their work.

Sticks and stones...

The presidential campaigns are underway in the US and candidates are enrolling bloggers as part of their visibility and coverage. Unlike traditional PR, where the candidates are in control of the messages, using bloggers carries a certain risk, as John Edwards (D-N.C.) has discovered. Two of the bloggers covering him are under attack for their positions on other matters, and Amanda Marcotte has just resigned over a flap from the catholic right (all the details in the Washington Post blog here). She felt she was impacting the candidate in a negative way. This raises a very interesting question:  in the oh-so-politically-correct US, there will be some  group feeling offended on any subject anytime. To be able to attack a candidate, and his communication plateform, by attacking the private opinions of the journalists covering him (on record through their blogs) is going to be a new form of sport. Will we be seeing some form of vetting of anybody working or reporting on a candidate  ? Will recruiting to work for a candidate entail matching his values and what he stand for, or else ? Seems a bit far fetched, but it looks like hunting season has started...

Blogger integrity

Reading an article by Michael Barbaro in the New York Times entitled "Wal-Mart enlist bloggers in its public relations campaign" got me thinking about the different ways companies react to and promote bloggers. The usual consensus is that bloggers speak their own piece, and give sources when they quote other people. Some companies have been known to fire employees forblogging about work - others, such as Microsoft, actually encorage it, as seen by the wide acceptance of Robert Scoble's blog. Since the web is supposed to be a conversation, peer to peer pressure will keep us honest. But what about companies trying to influence bloggers in order to get better PR ? If the bloggers quote where they get their information, then I guess it is OK - but it smacks a bit of manipulation to me.

Ethical blogging

There is very little discussion on ethics in the blogging world. So I was very happy to find this post of Jan. 31 by Rebecca Blood, who, besides a great description of the subject, proposes the following six rules to form a basis of ethical behavior for online publishers:

1. Publish as fact only what you believe is true

2. If material exists online, link to it when you reference it

3. Publicly correct any misinformation

4. Write each entry as if it could not be changed; add to, but do not rewrite or delete, any entry

5. Disclose any conflict of interest

6. Note questionable and biased sources.

When anonymous blogging is ethical

Spirit of America, set up by a government think tank with oil money,  has launched a "blog safer" wiki on how to blog anonymosly. They call it 5 initial guides on how to blog more safely. more

Usually ethics in the blogosphere would require people to declare who they are and what their interests are, but in places where there are repressive regimes, this can be very dangerous. So in a spirit of disobedience as a civic duty, in order to help society evolve, it is acceptable to blog anonymously.

Corporations loss of control ?

Corporations are usually control freaks about their image and the messages that they put out for PR purposes. So no wonder that they have not embraced the blogosphere. It is also hard for them to respond to outside people who do blog , and criticize them - because given the culture in the blogosphere, corporations are just not credible. There was some noise going on a while back about some employees being fired for contributing to a blog about their employer (check out Blogging at work and related article), and some people feel that companies are entitled to loyalty from their employees. Google fired an employee for blogging about his workplace environment. Basically, there seems to be a dearth of policies about this.

IBM is taking the lead in this matter, and has asked employees who blog to define guidelines. IBM considered the pros and cons of transparency, and decided to go for it.   James Snell's posting Blogging at IBM gives the scoop and link to the guidelines.