Is it just me or is everyone getting just a little bit overheated about the EL Paso affair? I note a certain self-righteousness about some of the posts, not to mention a rush to judgement. A few details seem to have been lost amid the kerfuffle:
1. The statements in El Paso about Kathy Maguire may not be libellous, so those bloggers who have so hastily assumed that they are would do well to cool their heels. To wrongly accuse another of defamation is in its self defamatory, as is accusing a person of not having respect for the law or for others.
2. The fact that El Paso have affected Ms. Maguire’s Google results is unfortunate for her, but not in its self a cause of action. (Google results are however a possible means of quantifying damages. More on this later.)
3. The purported cease and desist letter, written by one Ted Randall of CMR radio network is unprofessional in tone and full of typos. If I was sending such a letter with genuine litigious intent, (rather than merely as a scare tactic) I wouldn’t write it myself. I’d get it written by someone who knows how to spell “counsel?? properly. A lawyer for example. And I wouldn’t send it by e-mail either. Also, why would a radio station threaten to sue on Ms. Maguire’s behalf? In any case, you can’t sue for libel on behalf of another. So the letter is something of a hoax in its self. El Paso probably guessed as much and figured it’d make good fodder for an April fool. The Sunday Times weren’t the primary target of the hoax, but merely had the misfortune to run with the story.
Richard Waghorne couldn’t be more wrong in calling El Paso “a particularly pointless blog??. On the contrary, though I’ll grant you that the content is fairly risqué stuff, and would give me nightmares if I was the authors’ lawyer, I think it’s quite brilliant. It has the authentic funny-nasty atmosphere of a good pub gossip in a provincial Irish town. And people in provincial Irish towns love gossip, the more salacious the better. Certainly, they love it more than “what I’m reading??, “how my cats are getting on?? or “what I think about the Israeli elections??. It’s a different type of blog to, say, this one, but its hugely successful and far closer to the mainstream. To answer Richard’s jibe, the “point” of El Paso is, like that of all blogs, to provide items of interest to its readers, of which it has plenty. Local blogging of this kind may prove a growth area.
I’ve said it about bloggers before, and no doubt I’ll say it again: “Get over yourselves??. El Paso is more about Dundalk than it is about blogging, which may be why certain sophisticates find it embarrassing. Runningwithbulls has understandable reasons for not finding the joke all that funny, but I note, for example, that Adam Maguire, with his talk of “quality and integrity?? has clambered onto an inappropriately high horse. Similarly, the usually sensible Maman Poulet, like a village busybody lamenting a local n’er-do-well asks ‘Was anyone surprised it was them who got themselves into this mess?’. Further, she has suggested that El Paso is irresponsible and “has it’s own agenda??. Now doesn’t this imply that they should instead adhere to some other agenda? Perhaps one deemed appropriate by the “blogging community??? This to me is indicative of a snooty, “Irish Blog Establishment?? attitude. Only a few weeks after the first ever Blog Awards and we already have elder statesmen turning up their noses at provincial oiks. Forgive me if I’m not impressed. If El Paso defames someone, the victims have a remedy in libel. Let them seek such remedy if they wish, but don’t everyone else come the scold, bleating “you’re only ruining it for everyone else??.
35 Comments
Like the different view, Fergal.
I don’t really get the “you’re only ruining it for everyone else” vibe. Bloggers, while part of a niche community, have responsibility for their own blogs, and it is there that they stand or fall.
I don’t think I got on a high horse, I think I gave an opinion. Blogs are all here for different reasons, some people blog to talk about their feelings, some to give opinions. Some are here to anger and some are here to amuse. I believe that there is a place for blogs that deliver comment or news with quality and integrity, and there is a place for blogs that aren’t so serious. El Paso tends to try and tow the line but has made it clear in the last few days what its remit is; that’s all well and good but you can be sure that many readers won’t take the site as seriously as they may have done before.
I don’t see much difference in being critical of bloggers for getting on their high horse, and being critical of bloggers for going lower than low-brow, but that’s my opinion.
While I hate to speak in the absence of Maman Poulet, I took from her “its own agenda” comment just that, El Paso has its own agenda, different to the one it has stated (news and views from Dundalk). Again, that’s a matter of opinion though, and no one should demand that another blogger does anything.
I believe that the more blogs act like El Paso, the more readers and potential writers will be put off; they’re not ruining it for the rest of us but they may be hindering the future development of blogs, whatever that may be.
Let ye who blog without sin, cast the first stone
UPDATE: Fergal Crehan over at Tuppenceworth gives his two cents
That was meant to be a trackback by the way … someone really needs to show me how they work.
[…] Update: Fergal at Tuppenceworth.ie gives his opinion on the whole debacle, including some comments on my own stance. He raises some good points about the current legal status (the dodgy cease and desist for example, although it’s worth staying sceptical about the wording until an actual copy is put forward) and about the question of who was defamed (the last comments on Mrs. Maguire is arguably libel, however previous comments which are unavailable seem to be the source of contention). […]
Ah Adam do what you want! 🙂 I am not adverse to comment or interpretation!
I haven’t said that I think EP should do anything except apologise (and that was pre admittance of the hoax on the basis of what was on the website at the time). Neither have I said what they shouldn’t do – most of my post actually said that I could not give a toss and that my blogging would not be affected by the incident and I think the ‘end is nigh’ stuff was unnecessary. When do we automatically have to like everything anyone else does by the way? Surely FFFF’s would not have an outlet if this were to be the case?
[…] Hey snooty bloggers, stop being snooty, get over yourselves, cool it, stop being busy-bodies and stop telling other bloggers how to behave. Perhaps one deemed appropriate by the “blogging community???? This to me is indicative of a snooty, “Irish Blog Establishment??? attitude. Only a few weeks after the first ever Blog Awards and we already have elder statesmen turning up their noses at provincial oiks. […]
Ah Adam do what you want! 🙂 I am not adverse to comment or interpretation!
:S
Not sure if you quite got what I was saying, Maman; I wasn’t being critical of your post, I was commenting on what Fergal had referenced from it (the agenda comment). I never said you had told EP what to do, I just said that naturally no one should.
ungh… forget my last comment!
[…] Link to him. He or she* will get a lot of traffic by naming them too so if you are too lazy to use a link just use their name and you’ll build their audience. The Internet is funny like that. So if you truly dislike a blog or blogger then just ignore them. This is the attention economy and any kind of attention makes a site stronger. || Just in case people think this is a dig at Fergal or Team Tuppenceworth because that was the last post I made, it isn’t. I like the blog and respect them. Must stick em on my site blog roll whenever I unlazy myself to do it. This post stems from a private email conversation but I thought I’d stick my views on it links here. […]
Damnit, now the trackback makes it look worse. Nobody here is an asshole. Stupid automatic trackbacks, it’s not just you Colm!
No Adam the first line of my comment was for you in reference to your right to interpret me!! – the rest of my comment was in response to Fergal’s views and crowning of me as the village busybody!
El Paso has this post on their blog too. Hello El Paso folks!
Yeah, I figured that after I posted Maman… 😀
Stupid me and my insistance on posting instantly!
If I was sending such a letter with genuine litigious intent, (rather than merely as a scare tactic) I wouldn’t write it myself. I’d get it written by someone who knows how to spell “counsel??? properly. A lawyer for example. And I wouldn’t send it by e-mail either.
LOL. This reminds me of a particularly clueless US wingnut who sent such an exact same letter – typos and all! – to The Poor Man last year, much to the amusement of said blog…
(Btw, Mr. Crehan, good post. I agree with it.)
Maybe the reason this thing worked so well is because there is a tendency within the Irish blogosphere to react first and think later.
A bit of creative googling has the ability to produce a video presentation by the impressive Mr. Crehan giving the low down on tort-free use of the Interweb. I recommend it to anyone preparing for exams (he includes the textbook definition of libel) or for those who wish to avoid exposing themselves to suit – his point about people accusing others of defamation engaging in defamatory behaviour is a particularly pertinent one by the way; how many of us have had mere vulgar abuse/fair comment produce this reaction, whether serious or not?
Anyway, you’d want to have deep pockets and a strong case before you start taking yourself down the Four Courts because you’re annoyed at being caught out/slagged off/massively libelled by a politically illiterate gobshite.
I tend to picture the scene when some of our younger, more reactionary online buddies shrilly invoke the ancient protection of the common law whereby they demand Daddy remortgages the family home to pay for the day out in court.
Cue bailiffs.
Feel free to defame the poor lads. Only the prosperous are entitled to a good name.
(Fergal, feel free to delete this comment, if you’re not happy with a rush to google)
For the nosy, the link referred to by copernicus may be found here. Now Fergal’s going to have to delete us both.
Goodness me, I was surprised to find so many comments here, after a rather quickly dashed off post last night.
First things first, my tone was perhaps a bit intemperate. The “Village Busybody” thing was just an irresistable phrase that entered my head when I read Maman Poulet’s comment about not being surprised that El Paso got in trouble. It reminded me of my Mum saying things like “sure that family are always getting in trouble”. No malice intended MP, and I’m pleased to note that you’re being a good sport about it.
I do still stand by the sentiment though. Richard Waghorne made some suggestion that blogs will never graduate from an enjoyable free-for all if this kind of thing is allowed to be published. Adam, in suggesting that El Paso “may be hindering the future development of blogs” is essentially saying the same thing. And I simply couldn’t disagree more, which is where the “ruining it for everyone else” thing came from.
Finally, why is it that if you want to make noise in the bloggersphere the best way to do it is to blog about blogging? Is it because it’s the only thing we have in common? Just an idle thought
Not that my mum is a village busybody either of course. ahem.
Oh she’s already blogging about what you said on her FCMammy blog. You’re in for it now Fergal!
I do still stand by the sentiment though. Richard Waghorne made some suggestion that blogs will never graduate from an enjoyable free-for all if this kind of thing is allowed to be published. Adam, in suggesting that El Paso “may be hindering the future development of blogs??? is essentially saying the same thing. And I simply couldn’t disagree more, which is where the “ruining it for everyone else??? thing came from.
I would base my assumption on the way any negative aspects of blogging could be used to turn people off. If people want to push the idea that blogging is dangerous or whatever, and use EP as an example they could turn potential readers off, whom might be scared to participate for fear of being lead down a bad route. It may sound silly, but many people in this country/world are still very sceptical of the benefits of the internet and blogging against the negatives.
Finally, why is it that if you want to make noise in the bloggersphere the best way to do it is to blog about blogging? Is it because it’s the only thing we have in common? Just an idle thought
Fair point, and perhaps it is that we all have this in common; I think many bloggers (myself included) would like to see blogging become more mainstream and more accepted generally and any debate on the future of blogging, things that will help or hinder it, interest me quite a lot, but then again debates on all types of media do.. it’s just that blogging is still finding its place and has more to talk about and more opinions etc.
“any negative aspects of blogging could be used to turn people off”
So we ensure that there are no negative aspects? Christ, I’d rather just give up blogging. If people want to be turned off, then let them be turned off.
EP have not libelled anyone. How do I know this? Because it has not been so decided by a jury. Consequently, this, despite what’s been said elsewhere, is a freedom of speech issue. Except this time the purported reason for blog self-censorship is a fear of “frightening the horses” amongst those who know feck all about blogging. If people are thick enough to judge all blogs on the basis of a single example, bloggers are better off without their attention.
Anyway, doesn’t the whole “rock the boat” argument privelege the medium over the message? You might as well say that EP give the english language, or the personal computer a bad name.
Adam,
My views on the negative thing is that it’s like trying to tar all journalists with the same brush because of what some tabloid journo wrote. We’d be far stronger if we tackled negativity by saying El Paso is like the rest of the Blog O’Sphere in that they have the freedom to reach a mass audience and they have the ability to remain private (not anon, no such thing). The strengths and weaknesses of blogging are that there are no imposed boundaries or filters. It relies on people to be the judge. Newspapers do the same but they have paranoid editors and lawyers now who will vet material before publishing. Still, even then material which is later deemed to be libelous will slip through and a person is able to seek a remedy in Court if they think they’re wronged. If a blogger does something which you think has wronged you then you can go to court about it or you can blog yourself and point out your side of the story.
I would not like to see El Paso silenced or censored, let it do what it wants but I do think someone has the right to be heard in Court if they think El Paso has said something which has damaged their reputation.
Ban negative comments? God no, but expect people to be critical of them and don’t assume that criticising a blogger or blog puts you on a high horse.
Anyway, doesn’t the whole “rock the boat??? argument privelege the medium over the message?
No; I’m not hoping to see the blog become accepted in a wider audience, I’m hoping to see the blogger.
Damien, I agree with your last point, El Paso, like the rest of us has a right to say what they want and anyone who feels defamed by that has a right to legal process.
As for the comparison with newspapers, I get your point but my worry (I suppose) would be this; there are countless journalists in the public eye today, some good and some bad. When a bad one comes along you can’t help but notice that he/she is not representative of others in the trade. When bloggers get noticed in the MSM there are much fewer bloggers in the public eye to compare them with; while coverage of bloggers has increased dramatically in newspapers etc. if one publication was so inclined it could just give coverage to the negatives that come from it; people wouldn’t notice a lack of blog coverage because they don’t expect it.
For the record I’m not being paranoid, I have no fears of anti-blog media out there, waiting to destroy us all; I’m just saying that tabloid and sensationalist newspapers would much rather cover a story where people are being vicious and evil than one where they all get along nicely and try and teach each other something.
Clearly we’re getting nowhere trying to convince each other here Adam. The irreducible difference between us seems to be that I don’t care what people think about blogs in general and you do. As Bill O’Herlihy would say, “We’ll leave it there so”.
Clearly we’re getting nowhere trying to convince each other here Adam. The irreducible difference between us seems to be that I don’t care what people think about blogs in general and you do. As Bill O’Herlihy would say, “We’ll leave it there so???.
Clearly; for the record however I would like blogs to be accepted in the mainstream, if it so happens that they’re not it won’t effect what I do.
How do we feel about the importance of how people regard flogs?
Mmm… flogs.
They give me instant heartburn, but they are so very brightly coloured.
Okey dokey. 🙂
How do we feel about the importance of how people regard flogs?
Mmm… flogs.
They give me instant heartburn, but they are so very brightly coloured.
Most surely a matter best kept private between yourself and Mrs. Editor (whoever she may be) 😉
Ah, the not-so-humble flog, betarted confection, so stripy, sweet and flogging indigestible.
Statements about any individual saying that they are shagging a named person.
They are a whore, drug dealer, and come from a family who look like elephant people from cross breeding are defamation.
No court on any contenent would find those statements that were posted other wise.
This blob would not allow such a post.
an opionion regardless of how extreme is freedom of speech.
Name calling of this type is not.
This blog handles differences of opionion without any defamation.
That is not true with the El Paso Times.
By allowing these types of attacts on people that are not based in fact only devalues the blog.
Ed
Pray tell what ever happened to the El Paso Times. So bold spouting off at everyone!
Attacking sometimes innocent people!
Where have they gone?
The stopped taking comments and now don’t even post.
Seems like someone made good on their promise to shut them down!
It was about time!
They did nothing constructive to help Dundalk. Gave Dundalk a black eye.
Good riddance!
[…] the law of libel ever heard outside of the King’s Inns student canteen. We’ve been here before of […]