As a business person it surprises me that you make light of the use of your name as simply juvenile, especially with your training in journalism. Just let me share this with you, The Indiana Supreme Court takes a more stringent view, that such act constitute a violation of ones right to privacy. I can not use your name without your permission. Without your permission certain statements could be viewed as malicious and without legal privilege, which is similar to the journalist standard about public figures to put them in a bad light or harm their reputation.
In other words, that I can not go onto my blog and pretend to be Vince Robinson. I can not go write a comment on another blog sign your name and to give more credence to the signature linked the signature to your newspaper, INK.
Pray tell, what do you think the readers would think about your character and their decision in purchasing a subscription of your newspaper with such negative and vile comments attributed to you? Funny?
Or say I went online to recruit young children and signed your name and linked to your Newspaper, INK. Are you still finding it funny, if this individual intentional used your name once,( and as used others name) this individual has probably used your names and other individuals names places that only God knows where.
Juvenile? Innocent? This person intentionally hid behind your name. This person did not have the backbone and was unwilling to jeopardize his or her business, but thought nothing about jeopardizing your business. Still laughing? Think about when the global internet world type in your name and your newspaper those comments will be linked to the only African-American newspaper in Fort Wayne belonging to the one and only Vince Robinson. And that is you, not the person who made the comment. I don't know what else to say to get you to understand this is a liable act. I leave this case for you to read and hopefully you can see the connection.
Your anger seems very misdirected. Why all the rage against Mr. Robinson? If you take offense, then do so--he is not stopping you. That he doesn't use this forum for the degree of rant that you do is not your concern. That finds a difference in this person using his name on a local scale different than usinh his name for pediphilia is a better perspective than you have. For you to equte the two actions is a crazy stretch that is totally self-serving for you. I agree that no one should have used Mr. Robinson's name, but the greatest responsibility lies in the screening or lack thereof that permited this to so easily happen in the first place. That is where responsible journalism should have taken place--not in Mr. Robinson's ranting as you have done nor in the legal and costly pursuit of an anonymous blogger. Your anger is misdirected and seems more likely to portray your feelings toward Mr. Robinson than toward the real culprit and also completely avoids any responsibility in those who should have prevented it in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI believe I am enlighting Mr. Robinson on the law. It is obvious that I am not to have an opinion, in which I can express that disagrees with anyone.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mr. Robinson understand that this blog is about dialogue and not about rage or anger. Something that you fail to understand.
Mr. Robinson found my site and voluntary engage in dialogue and have not expressed your view. Mr. Robinson has written well and it is obvious that he is quite capable to speak in his own behalf.
I see nothing in self-serving in using the analogy for myself, but for you attempt to attack me. Mr. Robinson will understand it, you would have to be somewhat deep to get there. Mr. Robinson, as I understand it is a journalist, something that many bloggers do not understand about writing standards.
Once again, you understand little about the subject but thank for attempting to come over and read. Reading is easy reaching for understanding and clarity for what you read takes a special individual. Mr. Robinson has shown that quality, if you reread his posting you will see not once did he attack me.
Matter of fact, Mr. Robinson has invited me to his office, so he truly knows these are discussions and not anything about rage or anger.
Thank you
credo
Independent,
ReplyDeleteWhile I truly appreciate your concern on my behalf, it would be completely unproductive for me to pursue legal action. As you are well aware, the rules, or lack thereof, of blogging aren't an apples to apples comparison to the accepted rules of journalism.
When someone sends an editorial letter for publication in Ink or The Journal-Gazette or any other periodical, the editor is responsible for confirming that the person who signed the letter is actually the author. That's why submissions must include an address and telephone number for verification purposes.
With blogs like Independent and others, those rules go out the window. With too many blogs, there is no verification process. Cowards, like the person misusing my name, can make outrageous statements without fear of the consequences. While I DON'T find the COMMENTS funny, I do find the situation rather silly. If, for example, someone was trying to drive a wedge between you and me, that could be cleared up with a simple telephone call.
If, however, I were to consider a posting legally actionable, it seems to me that both the author and the moderator of a blog would be liable. Again, citing accepted rules of journalism, the moderator of the blog would have to accept blame for allowing a post without taking reasonable steps to verify the author - ESPECIALLY if there was suspicion that the author was claiming to be someone they are not.
So, what should I do? Get a lawyer or call the fake posts what they are: juvenile and cowardly?
What should you do? Verify bloggers who sign their posts? Filter out questionable posts?
I don't have the answers. You have to decide what best fits your vision for this blog. I just hope you don't let cowards and frauds ruin a much-needed forum for discussion.
Vince Robinson
Mr. Robinson:
ReplyDelete"Again, citing accepted rules of journalism, the moderator of the blog would have to accept blame for allowing a post without taking reasonable steps to verify the author - ESPECIALLY if there was suspicion that the author was claiming to be someone they are not."
I go beyond the rule of journalism to the rules of law, mere suspicion tells me little, direct evidence tells the facts that are provable.
As you know know, I would not know if it was you or a fake until you visited this blog. So quess what, I was buffering, until the moment you showed up. I had to wait, but you did.
I never believed the postings were from you, until voila, you showed up and guess what you confirmed in your first posting that someone had taken on your name, and disclaimed that prior posts were not your comments. That's all I needed.
But, to my surprise, I learned that you, (a journalist) was aware that someone was using your name and your newspaper name, but you viewed it as simply silly and humorous. Which is okay. But, I was fully aware that such actions were libelous and failed to see the humor in the hate filled comments, and it was going to stop without me having to monitoring comments.
Posting, is unlike a sniper sitting on a roof taking pot shots. Everything is recorded, the time the place and the author. But some folks who believed they were brilliant when they decided to travel down that path, forgot this rule at that moment in time. I never did. I just let them keep a wandering down that road.
Let me share this with you, nothing on the internet is unverifiable. I do not sign my name, but my identity had to be recorded somewhere for me to utilize this forum. You use INK, I use Fort Wayne African-American Independent Women as my calling card.
You're right I can censor commentors. But you missed the point, these posts are not automatic, you have to go through a few steps before it post. So, I suggest self-censor, or don't post. and if you do not wish to self-censor, one can run the risk of being held liable.
Fifth, I have continued to blog inspite of the offenders. And I did what I needed to do.
You shared with me what was going on with the NAACP campaign, I shared with you what was going on in the blogsphere. Thank you for showing up and proving to those who do support my blog, that someone was indeed on by blog pretending to be you.
It was not my concern for you, it was about proving a point to those who used your name and those who supported that person.
I don't care whether or not you sue that person or not. I wanted to prove that the coward won't be using anybody real name on this blog anytime soon..and that's the rest of the story.