My Kind Of Education Blog In Galveston, Tex.
"[Blog owner] Tetley received a letter Monday from the district's law firm demanding she remove what it termed libelous statements and other "legally offensive" statements posted by her or anonymous users, and refrain from allowing such postings in the future," according to this The Galveston County Daily News article. "The postings accuse Superintendent Lynne Cleveland, trustees and administrators of lying, manipulation, falsifying budget numbers, using their positions for "personal gain," violating the Open Meetings Act and spying on employees, among other things." (www.gisdwatch.com).
Digg
Del.icio.us
Wed Nov 14, 2007 at 7:08 AM
My Kind Of Education Blog In Galveston, Tex.
Although blogging sees itself as the last outpost of "free speech," there are questions, nagging ones.
I have been a party to five major free speech cases in federal court in this town since the 1960s (CAMP v. Chicago; King Movement v. Chicago; Substance v. Rohter; Schmidt v. Klunk; and Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees v. Schmidt and Substance).
I've reported major scandals with national implications (the Marva Collins Hoax, 1983-1984; the corporate school reform hoax and the "Daley miracle", 1996 - present) and major scandals with local implications (the Moffat sex crimes and coverup, 1984 - 1988; Chicago's budget lies, ongoing).
There are fine lines that everyone should at least be aware of when blogging, and one of them is that not every nifty keen rumor deserves amplification to the world. It takes hard work to check out the actual facts behind major stories, but no work at all to recycle opinions about "facts" someone else has reported and published (the typical blog thread, taking off from some report in the Sun-Times, Tribune, or elsewhere).
In more than 40 years of doing some serious stuff, I've never been successfully sued for libel (the threats are a dime a dozen) and the most serious legal attack on my reporting came because I published the truth, without obfuscation or abridgement (the CASE tests and commentary).
There is currently a generation coming to power that has only the vaguest notion of the line between fact and fiction, a generation spawned by Oprahization and obfuscation of reality. It may well be that the libel laws are a healthy check on boisterous but ignorant blovations. We'll see.
I'm a First Amendment fundamentalist. It's been costly, but never regretted. Lying, however, or spreading rumors and gossip with no checking, is a different story. I lost a teaching job in Chicago for publishing the truth (off campus; out of the building; on my own time and dime). So I have some rights to comment here and will continue to do so.
Irresponsible blovations may not be any healthier for democracy than the minless repetition of "good story lines" that Oprah has made a bedrock of "reality" the past decade or so.
I have been a party to five major free speech cases in federal court in this town since the 1960s (CAMP v. Chicago; King Movement v. Chicago; Substance v. Rohter; Schmidt v. Klunk; and Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees v. Schmidt and Substance).
I've reported major scandals with national implications (the Marva Collins Hoax, 1983-1984; the corporate school reform hoax and the "Daley miracle", 1996 - present) and major scandals with local implications (the Moffat sex crimes and coverup, 1984 - 1988; Chicago's budget lies, ongoing).
There are fine lines that everyone should at least be aware of when blogging, and one of them is that not every nifty keen rumor deserves amplification to the world. It takes hard work to check out the actual facts behind major stories, but no work at all to recycle opinions about "facts" someone else has reported and published (the typical blog thread, taking off from some report in the Sun-Times, Tribune, or elsewhere).
In more than 40 years of doing some serious stuff, I've never been successfully sued for libel (the threats are a dime a dozen) and the most serious legal attack on my reporting came because I published the truth, without obfuscation or abridgement (the CASE tests and commentary).
There is currently a generation coming to power that has only the vaguest notion of the line between fact and fiction, a generation spawned by Oprahization and obfuscation of reality. It may well be that the libel laws are a healthy check on boisterous but ignorant blovations. We'll see.
I'm a First Amendment fundamentalist. It's been costly, but never regretted. Lying, however, or spreading rumors and gossip with no checking, is a different story. I lost a teaching job in Chicago for publishing the truth (off campus; out of the building; on my own time and dime). So I have some rights to comment here and will continue to do so.
Irresponsible blovations may not be any healthier for democracy than the minless repetition of "good story lines" that Oprah has made a bedrock of "reality" the past decade or so.
Wed Nov 14, 2007 at 10:01 AM
My Kind Of Education Blog In Galveston, Tex.
this isn't all that complicated. assertions and opinions are just that. folks who can back up what they're saying can do so by referring to outside sources. commenters on this blog do a little of both. and sometimes the rumors are right.
Thu Nov 15, 2007 at 2:40 AM
My Kind Of Education Blog In Galveston, Tex.
I agree that sometimes the rumors are right. Been there; done that. My suggestion is, however, that we continue to hone our ability to identify and recognize rumors versus other. Let me give you one very very personal example. When I was running for CTU president against Jackie Vaughn in 1988, her sleazier people kept trying to get stuff thrown "over the transom" to some reporters, slime against me. The day before the day before the election, Kup's column bit, even though, back then, the rule was that nothing that came in during the final week before an election should be used. (The person who told me that, at the time, was Sun-Times education reporter Linda Lenz, who might have been "Wertsch" back then).
Well, it came over the transom, and Vaughn's people were waiting to spin it. They did a phone bank, sliming me with, especially, elementary teachers and career service people. "Did you read in Kup..." etc. I still got 40 percent of the vote, but there was no way to counter that particulat lie.
Today that kind of stuff is called "Swift Boating," but it's always been around.
Anyway, let's just continue to try and sort BS from other. The credibility of a blog (or bloggers) is as important as any other in the world of reporting.
Well, it came over the transom, and Vaughn's people were waiting to spin it. They did a phone bank, sliming me with, especially, elementary teachers and career service people. "Did you read in Kup..." etc. I still got 40 percent of the vote, but there was no way to counter that particulat lie.
Today that kind of stuff is called "Swift Boating," but it's always been around.
Anyway, let's just continue to try and sort BS from other. The credibility of a blog (or bloggers) is as important as any other in the world of reporting.
