Last week, the ABC’s Media Watch did a piece on the offensive comments left by some readers on newspaper websites and one blog: in this case, Tim Blair’s popular weblog. There is no doubt that the comments shown on the program are extremely offensive and are obviously the work of immature idiots. For example, take this comment in relation to Muslim taxi drivers who supposedly didn’t carry guide dogs:
If these people won’t do the job required, then get rid of them. I assume that they would make a reasonably decent, compost.
In an interesting twist, it emerged that the comments used in the ABC piece were apparently provided by members of an Australian Muslim internet forum. Tim then responds, as one would expect, by highlighting some comments posted by members of that particular website, with the implication being that Media Watch were being hypocritical for not including the forum in their critique as well. Today, in the latest installment of this unfolding soap opera, he published an email purportedly addressed to the program executive producer and presenter but sent in error to one of Blair’s readers. The email appears to confirm that the Media Watch researcher was aided by a member of the forum who was, it seems, a former colleague. Additional commentary on the issue (from a variety of perspectives) can be found here, here, here, here and here.
However, more interesting than all this internet drama, are the questions this incident raises about the nature of blogging. Firstly, are blogs now considered to be part of the ‘media’ such that they should be held to the same standards as newspaper and television outlets? Secondly, the reason Blair’s blog seems to have been given this attention is because of his day job as Opinion Editor for the Daily Telegraph. Given his blog predates his job with the Telegraph and given it is not run under the auspices of the newspaper, does it warrant Media Watch coverage? And, thirdly, to what extent should bloggers (and, by extension, forum owners) be held accountable for the comments they allow to be published?
5 comments ↓
At law, bloggers are responsible for the moderating decisions they make. Hence, neither Blair nor myself nor any other blogger can escape legal responsibility. That’s just how it is.
And on the topic of hateful idiots, here’s the famous radio personality John Laws talking about Arabs, sand and camels.
This is actually a very interesting point: are bloggers considered “journalists”, and therefore, do they expose themselves to the same level of scrutiny as larger media outlets? There is already case law on this overseas, and I suspect it will only increase in the years to come with the rise of the blogosphere and the select few that emerge with a level of influence.
On the point about comments allowed on some of these sites, media outlets should be responsible in what they allow. It’s that simple.
The inclusion of Tim Blair, however, is puzzling. It’s just a blog. In response, Blair points out that Muslim Village, the subject of media fodder on several occasions, also contains offensive postings. Even then, the internet, a vast savage wasteland of pap and hubris, is filled with sites more “offensive”.
As a forum, Muslim Village should not be considered to be indicative of anything, as is the case with Blair’s blog, because he doesn’t hold it out as a source of media. It’s personal opinion.
Really, if we were to single out blogs and forums with racist/prejudiced rants, we’d be here for quite a while. But media outlets should seek loftier ideals.
In my opinion, it was an error of judgement to include Blair’s personal blog alongside the DT just because, it seems, a lot of people read him and his current day job happens to be as the opinion page editor of the newspaper. If the opinion page had become a vehicle for these sorts of comments, then it would be fair enough but targeting his blog just seems a bit silly and undermines an otherwise interesting piece.
Bloggers are not journalists and blogs are not professional media outlets. They typically don’t sell advertising, don’t hold themselves out as being ‘fair and balanced’ and don’t have the resources of the newspapers and television stations. Blogs also don’t purport to be the “fourth estate” in a democracy: playing that crucial role of holding politicians to account and ensuring there is some transparency so that the citizenry can make informed political decisions. That doesn’t mean bloggers shouldn’t be challenged but, to borrow the phrase popularised by the recent gang wars in Melbourne, we should “catch and kill our own”. In other words, let the blogs deal with the other blogs and, if we must have a public broadcaster (a discussion for another time), then let it deal with other media outlets.
[...] Amir at Austrolabe also gets stuck into this issue and tries to quantify the risk of radicalisation of Muslim youth in Australia. He also has a nuanced take on the recent Tim Blair vs Media Watch brouhaha. [...]
Leave a Comment