Slashdot Mirror
Forbes Goes After Bloggers
walterbyrd writes "In a recent article, Forbes bashes bloggers big time (forbesdontbug/forbesdontbug)." From the article: "Blogs started a few years ago as a simple way for people to keep online diaries. Suddenly they are the ultimate vehicle for brand-bashing, personal attacks, political extremism and smear campaigns. It's not easy to fight back: Often a bashing victim can't even figure out who his attacker is. No target is too mighty, or too obscure, for this new and virulent strain of oratory. Microsoft has been hammered by bloggers; so have CBS, CNN and ABC News, two research boutiques that criticized IBM's Notes software, the maker of Kryptonite bike locks, a Virginia congressman outed as a homosexual and dozens of other victims--even a right-wing blogger who dared defend a blog-mob scapegoat. " BoingBoing has a long post about the article.
from Microsoft shill Daniel Lyons? Any time he can make Linux or anyone connected to 'free', 'open', etc., look bad, he'll do it. Truth be damned.
Mike
We're talking about written material posted on blogs here, so slander is right out. That leaves libel.
Now the thing about libel is, it can't be libel if it's actually true (at least in the US, where Forbes is based). The Forbes article bitches about, among other things, bloggers saying mean things about poor little old Kryptonite Corporation. But the things is, what they were saying was true; the company was selling faulty, easily picked locks and hoping no one would notice. Ergo, what the bloggers were posting wasn't remotely libelous.
Since what the article is attacking meets neither the standard for slander nor libel, that leaves good old fashioned free speech. So the assertion made by many here is valid: Forbes Magazine is attacking Free Speech.
His articles are in fact not very Linux friendly.
Suddenly they are the ultimate vehicle for brand-bashing, personal attacks, political extremism and smear campaigns.
Sounds like Forbes feels threatened. Bloggers seem to have taken what the media has done for years and just done it on the grass-roots level.
It's not easy to fight back... Ok, so who exactly is the victim? this ambiguous sentence reaffirms Forbes' percieved threat. Often a bashing victim can't even figure out who his attacker is. No target is too mighty, or too obscure, for this new and virulent strain of oratory. Oh, yes, because the media is such a bastion of ethics and morals . ::cough cough:: Not that I'd mention any names ::cough cough:: Michael Shiavo, Gary Condit ::cough cough::. Because the media certainly these people out. Michael Shiavo now has this undeserved stardom and is the object of hate for radicals. Gary Condit was basically ruinned by the media (although his competance is questionable) because he had this affair (a common task of wealthy and powerful men).
Microsoft has been hammered by bloggers; so have CBS, CNN and ABC News, two research boutiques that criticized IBM's Notes software, the maker of Kryptonite bike locks, a Virginia congressman outed as a homosexual and dozens of other victims--even a right-wing blogger who dared defend a blog-mob scapegoat. Refer to the comments above. Not only has the media meddled in areas it has no right to, but it hasn't gone into areas it needs to. Is the media pissed that people actually question what they right ::shock!:: ::cough cough::. I really should get this cold checked out, that avian flu is supposed to be in Asia. Oh, wait, some more media hype about a disease that has only really affected people in Vietnam who have come in close contact with cattle dung. Sorry, Forbes, ya lose. The media will have to adapt to the blogosphere. Hell, the blogosphere is actually a source of good in the media. Dan Rather's bluff was called by a blogger, and the blogger was right on. I for one hate the media and its self-importance. The media a) reports no relevant news, b) is guilty of more "terrorism" crimes than bin Laden himself, c) is horribly biased, d) is so arrogant that corrections MUST go on the second page in small print, e) doesn't hold officials accountable (can anyone say "Abu Ghraib" or "Kosovo"? Anyone...? Anyone...?) f) gives only some actual facts, and usually distorted ones at that, with no indepth analysis whatsoever g) is so concerned about being "first to cover", or have "breaking news" or whatever bullshit of the week to pander to viewers. I'm really tired of all of the big media establishment. They're bunch of pompous, arrogant shitheads who think far too idealistically and are willing to pin blame on their dead mother's gravestones. I am tired of them, and demand change. Bloggers of the world...well, keep blogging!
Asides from the /. affect Forbes is going to suffer, imagine the brilliant move of torquing off a large section of one's current and future demographic? Brillian, absolutely brilliant.
0 04104
Of course then there are the countless parodies - here's the anti-blog cover redone to mock the ginned-up hysteria:
http://www.blogs4god.com/node/626
Not to mention the crappy legal advice the column offered, which is nicely reubtted using the DCMA's own verbage:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004104.php#
Sheesh - didn't the editors ask for some research first? Or is that only the domain of bloggers and not 'real journalists'
--- have you healed your church website?