Friday, February 16, 2007
New policy on isen.blog comments
At the FTC Broadband competition hearing last Tuesday and Wednesday, I had the delightful experience of meeting several members of "Hands Off the Internet," that remarkably civic-minded "coalition of Internet users," like AT&T, Alcatel-Lucent and the National Association of Manufacturers that fights against evils like Network Neutrality. HOTI Co-Chairman Chris Wolf and two other Hands-Off employees were there.
I am usually happy to meet somebody who comments on my blog, so I shook hands all around and asked them which one of them commented on my blog using the name "HandsOff." They all used that name, they said. And Chris Wolf added that he approves all blog comments before they go out.
Hmmm. A team effort. With a top-down filter . . .
So I'm adopting a new policy w/r/t comments on isen.blog:
If comments are corporate or organizational messages, or if I have reason to suspect that they're something besides the individual voice of an unbeholden commentator, and they're not labeled clearly as representing that organization, then I'll label them as I see fit or reject them.
Usually publications charge for ads. I won't do that. But I'm not going to have a bunch of astroturf messages masquerading as personal opinions, not on my blog!
If you're saying what you believe, and you're saying it clean, welcome to isen.blog! But (a) if it feels slimy, ad hominem or intellectually dishonest to me, or (b) if it is an engineered message from an entity with an organizational agenda or their paid agents, I just might reject or repurpose it.
If you're representing an organization, I INSIST that you clearly identify the organization AND the fact that your voice is its voice. If you do not, I consider this tantamount to fraud. If you're representing yourself, while I recognize the benefits of anonymous speech and do not rule out anonymous contributions, it'll help if you sign your real name and include contact information.
I am usually happy to meet somebody who comments on my blog, so I shook hands all around and asked them which one of them commented on my blog using the name "HandsOff." They all used that name, they said. And Chris Wolf added that he approves all blog comments before they go out.
Hmmm. A team effort. With a top-down filter . . .
So I'm adopting a new policy w/r/t comments on isen.blog:
If comments are corporate or organizational messages, or if I have reason to suspect that they're something besides the individual voice of an unbeholden commentator, and they're not labeled clearly as representing that organization, then I'll label them as I see fit or reject them.
Usually publications charge for ads. I won't do that. But I'm not going to have a bunch of astroturf messages masquerading as personal opinions, not on my blog!
If you're saying what you believe, and you're saying it clean, welcome to isen.blog! But (a) if it feels slimy, ad hominem or intellectually dishonest to me, or (b) if it is an engineered message from an entity with an organizational agenda or their paid agents, I just might reject or repurpose it.
If you're representing an organization, I INSIST that you clearly identify the organization AND the fact that your voice is its voice. If you do not, I consider this tantamount to fraud. If you're representing yourself, while I recognize the benefits of anonymous speech and do not rule out anonymous contributions, it'll help if you sign your real name and include contact information.
Technorati Tags: Astroturf, blogging
Comments:
Hi Dave.
I think the essence of your comment policy is sound, and based on your thoughts have crafted a similar one for myself:
http://www.interflect.com/DocGet.php?doctype=blog&id=219
The only area I had trouble reconciling was judging what is intellectually dishonest or not. I am not sure whether I trust myself to do that or not ;-) Seriously, seems like a bit of slippery slope. Perhaps if you impose a high bar for only the most obvious cases it is workable. At any rate, an interesting aspect of your policy to discuss......
I think the essence of your comment policy is sound, and based on your thoughts have crafted a similar one for myself:
http://www.interflect.com/DocGet.php?doctype=blog&id=219
The only area I had trouble reconciling was judging what is intellectually dishonest or not. I am not sure whether I trust myself to do that or not ;-) Seriously, seems like a bit of slippery slope. Perhaps if you impose a high bar for only the most obvious cases it is workable. At any rate, an interesting aspect of your policy to discuss......
they're something besides the individual voice of an unbeholden commentator
Sorry, I think that ship sailed long ago ... :-(
Post a Comment
Sorry, I think that ship sailed long ago ... :-(
