AFP: Blogger jailed in Anna Nicole Smith defamation suit

Monday, June 1, 2009 – 9:23 am

HOUSTON, Texas (AFP) - A real estate agent in Houston who blogged about Anna Nicole Smith was jailed for contempt last week in a defamation case brought by the late Playboy model’s mother.

Legal experts said bloggers are increasingly the targets of such litigation, which are testing the bounds of free speech.

Lyndal Harrington, who is accused of helping to spread falsehoods that Virgie Arthur married her stepbrother and abused Smith as a child, spent four nights in jail after she failed to comply with a court order to turn over her computer.

The 53-year-old grandmother claimed her computer was stolen during a burglary less than a week after it was subpoenaed.

A police officer testified that he believed the theft was staged and judge Tony Lindsay ordered Harrington to produce the computer by July 2 or she will again face incarceration.

Harrington says she is shocked that she is being sued for comments posted on someone else’s blog to pass the time.

“I just voiced my opinion,” said Lyndal Harrington of her posts about Smith and Arthur on the website “Rose Speaks.”

Like many bloggers, Harrington doesn’t consider herself a publisher and did not realize she could be held liable for her posts.

“I got into this because my business had fallen apart in this economy and it was something to do,” she told AFP. “I developed a lot of friendships with women who are retired or ill at home.”

Three other bloggers are named in the suit along with Smith’s former companion, Howard K. Stern, and Larry Birkhead, the father of her daughter, Dannielynn.

Arthur alleges that the defendants conspired to defame her so she wouldn’t get custody of Dannielynn, who could inherit up to 88 million dollars.

“Lyndall Harrington is a liar who faked a burglary,” said Neil McCabe who represents Arthur.

“She’s part of a conspiracy to defame my client and she’s done her own defaming of my client.”

Lawsuits against bloggers in the United States have been doubling every year since 2004 with 15 million dollars in judgments so far against them, according to Robert Cox, president of the Media Bloggers Association.

“A lot of bloggers think of themselves as individuals or maybe writers but in the courts, they are considered a publisher,” Cox said.

His organization has created an on-line course with Harvard Law School, City of New York School of Journalism and News University at the Poynter Institute at Northwestern University to educate bloggers about their legal rights and responsibilities.

“A lot of these cases could have been avoided if things had been worded just a little differently or if they had double sourced their information,” Cox said.

“Most of the time, these people are not trained journalists.”

The spike in suits is due in part to the burgeoning number of bloggers.

About 175,000 new blogs are created every day according to Technorati, a blog search engine.

But it also has to do with people’s growing obsession with controlling their on-line reputations and new technologies that allow them to do it.

“With Google alerts and rss feeds, it’s a lot easier to monitor what’s being said about you,” said Sam Bayard, assistant director of the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard University.

Moreover, the technology exists to find anonymous bloggers.

“People can find you,” said Cox at the Media Blogger Association, which this year began offering its members legal expenses insurance for an annual fee of 540 dollars for 100,000 dollars of coverage.

The majority of cases against bloggers are for defamation but they are also frequently sued for copyright infringement and invasion of privacy.

“There’s this Wild West mentality where people think they can do anything on the Web and not be held liable,” said Bayard.

While state laws vary on what constitutes defamation and who qualifies as a journalist and thus who can protect sources, Bayard said, judges have consistently applied the same standards to blogs as they would any other medium of expression.

“Defamation is defamation no matter whether it is written on paper or on a blog,” he said.

AFP: Swedish pirates have wind in their sails for EU vote

Monday, June 1, 2009 – 9:13 am

STOCKHOLM (AFP) - A Swedish party which wants an Internet filesharing free-for-all, the Pirate Party, could become one of the surprise new entrants to the European parliament this week.

The party, which also wants to beef up Internet privacy, was founded in January 2006 and quickly attracted members angered by controversial laws adopted in the Scandinavian country that criminalised filesharing and authorised monitoring of emails.

Its membership shot up after a Stockholm court on April 17 sentenced four Swedes to a year in jail for running one of the world’s biggest filesharing sites, The Pirate Bay.

“When the verdict was announced at 11:00 am, we had 14,711 members,” Rick Falkvinge, the 37-year-old founder of the party, told AFP.

“We tripled in a week, becoming the third-biggest party in Sweden in terms of numbers. All of a sudden we were everywhere.”

Opinion polls ahead of the June 7 European parliament elections credit the party with between 5.5 and 7.9 percent of votes, well above the four percent required to win a seat.

In the 2006 general election, held eight months after it’s creation, the Pirate Party won just 0.6 percent of votes.

“They have been very lucky because The Pirate Bay verdict came at the same time as the start of the election campaign, but I think The Pirate Party had the potential to grow anyway,” a political scientist at Gothenburg University, Ulf Bjereld, told AFP.

“The Pirate Party has taken advantage of a new cleavage in Swedish politics, about civil liberties, about who should have the right to decide over knowledge, and that’s not a left-right cleavage,” Bjereld said.

“The traditional parties have been sleeping, they have underestimated the political potential in these issues,” he added.

The European parliament election, with little at stake in Sweden and a low turnout expected, is considered the perfect opportunity for an election sensation, according to experts.

“People tend to think there are very few differences between the parties in the EU elections. If you could have a (unique) profile there, it’s easier to succeed,” said Toivo Sjoeren, head of the Sifo polling institute.

The typical Pirate Party supporter is a young, male Internet buff.

According to Sifo, some 13 percent of people under 30 plan to vote for the party, compared to seven percent of those aged 30 to 49, and only three percent of those over the age of 49.

The party garners some 10.5 percent support among male voters, but only 1.5 percent of women.

“It’s a ‘geek’ party,” admitted Brian Levinsen, a 31-year-old member, attending a recent campaign meeting in Stockholm.

“We use Twitter, Skype, we use blogs,” explained Jan Lindgren, the party’s campaign director in Stockholm.

“There is always someone (from the party) online, even at 2:00 or 4:00 in the morning,” he added.

Many members say they joined not only because they are die-hard fans of the Internet and filesharing, but because they fear a “Big Brother” society.

“Sweden was built on protecting the freedom of its citizens. This pact is now disappearing,” said Levinsen.

“They want to impose controls on what we’re saying, like in China or in North Korea. We’re not there yet, but we’re on the way,” said Robert Nyberg, a 29-year-old demolition worker clad in a purple tee-shirt bearing the party’s black flag.

The Pirate Party, which has sister parties in 20 countries, is also standing in the European elections in Poland and Germany.

An estimated 375 million voters across the 27 nation bloc will elect 736 deputies for a five-year term at the parliament, which has an important role passing pan-European legislation and the EU commission’s annual budget.

Man bites dog, a new version

Sunday, May 10, 2009 – 12:32 pm

From Lakbima, 08/05/2009

AP: Murdoch leads charge to get readers to pay online

Sunday, May 10, 2009 – 7:43 am

WASHINGTON (AFP) - As US newspapers shrivel up and die, an unlikely figure is emerging as their potential savior: News Corp. chairman Rupert Murdoch.

The much-villified Australian-born media tycoon is preparing to battle against the practice many hold largely responsible for newspapers’ current plight — the “original sin” of giving away their content for free online.

The 78-year-old Murdoch announced this week that the days of free are over.

He said he planned to begin charging readers of the websites of News Corp. newspapers “within the next 12 months,” testing the scheme “first on some of our stronger ones.

“We are now in the midst of an epochal debate over the value of content, and it is clear to many newspapers the current model is malfunctioning,” said Murdoch, whose newspaper holdings include The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, The Times of London, the Sun and The Australian, among others.

The Wall Street Journal online already requires a subscription fee but newspaper owners across the United States will be closely watching as Murdoch bucks the conventional wisdom and extends a pay wall to other publications.

Murdoch himself is a late convert to the notion of making readers pay online, having planned before buying the Journal two years ago to do away with the subscription system in a bid to increase traffic to wsj.com.

He changed his mind after taking over the paper, but it is precisely that kind of flexibility that some analysts point to when they say Murdoch may be the media magnate best equipped to lead newspapers into the digital age.

“The track record shows that Rupert Murdoch is nothing if not bold,” said Rick Edmonds, a media business analyst at the Poynter Institute, a non-profit journalism school based in Florida. “I don’t think it’s entirely surprising for him to be leading the way.”

Frequently accused in the past of promoting tabloid journalism, Murdoch is “sometimes villified for the wrong reasons,” according to Edmonds. “There’s quite a degree of respect for him as an operator.”

“Whatever you say about Murdoch, the guy’s a savvy businessman,” said Ryan Chittum, a business writer at the Columbia Journalism Review. “He knows a failed business model when he sees one.

“The free model has failed,” said Chittum, who worked as a reporter at the Journal and left around the time News Corp. took over.

“The ad revenue’s not there online and it’s not going to be there,” he said. “To have the scale to produce their current levels of journalism, newspapers are going to have to find other revenue sources.”

Struggling US newspaper publishers would not dispute Murdoch’s assessment that the current system is “malfunctioning” and that online advertising is not generating the revenue needed to support their current newsrooms.

But few have been willing to start charging readers online out of fears of losing traffic to their websites.

With Murdoch taking the lead and print advertising revenue evaporating at a dizzying pace, analysts said more newspapers may be ready to take the plunge.

“There’s definitely momentum among newspapers in the area of charging online, especially as the financial situation continues to deteriorate,” said Zachary Seward, assistant editor at Harvard University’s Nieman Journalism Lab. “Whether it’s a good business decision remains to be seen.”

“It’s risky,” agreed Poynter’s Edmonds. “But on the other hand, there’s a lot of debate and a lot of sentiment within the industry that maybe they took the wrong fork in the road a few years ago.”

Edmonds noted that a number of US newspapers, including The New York Times with its failed “Times Select” payment scheme, had experimented with charging readers.

“The proposition of putting the New York Post or The Times of London behind a pay wall — it’s not immediately clear to me why that would go over better with readers than pay online attempts in the past,” Edmonds said.

“Quite a few United States papers experimented with that at least for a while and typically found their traffic fell through the floor and therefore weren’t getting much ad revenue.

“The Journal, a lot of people say, is a special case because of the relevance of that information to people’s businesses,” he added. “It makes them a lot more willing to pay.”

Chittum said there may be risks but the US newspaper industry no longer has the luxury of sitting back, waiting and watching what happens with the Murdoch papers.

“They can’t dither and talk and think-tank anymore,” he said. “A lot of these papers are going to go broke if they don’t do something soon.”

Reuters: EU urges Internet governance revamp

Monday, May 4, 2009 – 6:14 pm

STRASBOURG, France (Reuters) - The body in charge of assigning Internet addresses such as .com and .net should be shorn of its U.S. government links from October and made fully independent, the European Union’s information society chief said on Monday.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a not-for-profit organization set up in 1998 but operates under the aegis of the U.S. Department of Commerce, a set-up that raises concerns for some as the Internet is seen as belonging to a wider constituency.

Pressure in the past on ICANN from right-wing politicians to stop .xxx from becoming a domain name for pornography, worried some policymakers. ICANN’s operating agreement with the U.S. government expires at the end of September.

“This opens the door for the full privatization of ICANN and it also raises the question of to whom ICANN should be accountable, as from 1 October,” EU Information Society Commissioner Viviane Reding said in a statement.

She urged U.S. President Barack Obama to agree to a “new, more accountable, more transparent, more democratic and more multilateral form of Internet governance.”

ICANN decides on what names can be added to the Internet’s top level domains (TLDs) such as .com but Reding wants it to become completely independent, overseen by an independent judicial body as well as a “G12 for Internet Governance” to discuss Internet and security issues.

“In the long run, it is not defendable that the government department of only one country has oversight of an Internet function which is used by hundreds of millions of people in countries all over the world,” Reding said.

Such a “G12″ would include two representatives from each North America, South America, Europe and Africa, three representatives from Asia and Australia, as well as the chairman of ICANN as a non-voting member.

The European Commission holds a public hearing on Wednesday in Brussels to debate future governance of the Internet.

Despite Dept of Commerce concerns, ICANN agreed last year to relax the rules on TLDs, the suffixes, such as the ubiquitous .com, .net and .org, among others.

(Reporting by Huw Jones; Editing by David Cowell)

AP: New venture aims to introduce fees for online news

Wednesday, April 15, 2009 – 8:48 am

SAN FRANCISCO -Three media veterans plan to bundle the Internet content of newspaper and magazine publishers into a subscription package that will test Web surfers’ willingness to pay for material that has been given away for years.

The system won’t be ready until the fall, but the plans were announced late Tuesday because so many publishers already are clamoring to sign up, said Steven Brill, co-chief executive of the new venture, called Journalism Online.

“The interest in this came together a lot more quickly than we anticipated,” said Brill, the founder of Court TV and American Lawyer magazine. “We are dancing as fast as we can now.”

Brill declined to identify the publishers willing to participate because agreements haven’t yet been signed.

Journalism Online’s other principals are former Wall Street Journal publisher Gordon Crovitz and former cable television executive Leo Hindery.

The decision to place more toll booths in front of online news reflects the deepening financial problems threatening the survival of print publishers, particularly newspapers.

Since 2005, the annual volume of print advertising in U.S. newspapers has plunged by $12.7 billion, or 27 percent, according to the Newspaper Association of America. Over the same time, the amount of online advertising on newspaper Web sites has risen by $1.1 billion, a 53 percent increase, not nearly enough to offset the erosion in print.

With their profits shriveling, newspapers have been laying off workers and cutting other costs. In the most severe cases, five newspaper publishers have filed for bankruptcy protection since late last year, while the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has gone online only and the Rocky Mountain News has closed.

Many newspaper publishers now believe they can stop the hemorrhaging by charging for at least some of the material on their Web sites instead of giving it away. Besides raising more revenue online, Internet subscriptions could be included in the cost of a print subscription, as a way to persuade more readers to keep paying for print editions.

“That’s a very important piece of this,” Brill said. “If you are trying to sell your product with one hand and give it away with the other, then you are undermining the integrity of your product.”

The risk of asking readers to pay for online news is that many publishers might find it shrinks their audience, especially if other news sites remain free. And that could leave the publishers that charge Internet fees with even less ad revenue, exacerbating their headaches.

Few newspapers now charge for access to their Web sites. The Wall Street Journal is the largest one to do so, with nearly 1.1 million subscribers.

By putting content behind a “pay wall,” publishers also could keep search engines from indexing the stories and then delivering links to them in search results. Journalism Online hopes to negotiate licensing agreements with Google and other services so the search engines could show links to stories that only paying subscribers can read.

Journalism Online’s business model will share some elements with the cable and satellite TV packages that have become staples in millions of households.

The company plans to offer an “all-you-can-read” option that would give customers access to the content of all the participating publishers for a monthly fee, expected to range from $15 to $20, Brill said. The publishers will divvy up the revenue, based on which articles draw the most readership each month.

Readers also will able to buy a pass for one-day access to the content kept behind the so-called pay wall.

Beyond asking more readers to pay for online news, the newspaper industry also appears poised to try harder to stop the spread of its material to free sites beyond its control. Last week The Associated Press, a not-for-profit cooperative, announced it would get more aggressive in blocking the unlicensed use of the industry’s copyright material.

Journalism Online appears ready to handle antitrust, copyright or other legal concerns triggered by its plans. The company’s board of advisers includes prominent antitrust lawyer David Boies and Theodore Olson, former U.S. solicitor general.

Suicide bomber: mistaken identity

Friday, April 3, 2009 – 9:52 pm

Divaina newspaper on March 13, 2009 had to apologise for a photograph which it published (apparently in its provincial edition/s) few days back claiming that the severed head in the picture was of the suicide bomber responsible for bomb blast in Matara. The apology was not for publishing the severed head but for mistaken identity. The newspaper said that the severed head that was published was not of the suicide bomber, but of a local council member who succumbed during the explosion.

Following is the apology published by the newspaper:

UN FAO becomes ‘good’

Friday, April 3, 2009 – 9:00 pm

It seems after all allegations against the UN system, that the UN has commenced an image building exercise. First item on the agenda seems to be turning some of its agencies good…

Printer's Devil makes FAO a good organisation

Printer's Devil makes FAO a good organisation

Sunday Observer on March 22, 2009 published this advertisement and a week later carried a correction stating that the FAO has not really changed its name but it was an error caused by the printer’s devil.

It’s not cricket

Thursday, March 12, 2009 – 10:36 am

Sanjana Hattotuwa in latest issue of Groundviews critiques the differences between the media coverage on the attack on the cricket team and the coverage on the humanitarian situation in the Wanni in It’s not cricket:

“…there was no shortage of genuine concern for the safety and security of our cricketers. The outrageous attack on our cricketer team usurped vestigial local media coverage of the humanitarian crises in the Vanni. Instead we now consume penetrating analysis of the future of cricket in Pakistan, insights into the nature of injuries sustained by players and replays of tearful reunions at the airport. Perhaps life imitates art - anyone who has read David Blacker’s A Cause Untrue will also recognise the familiarity of some of the theories bandied around now suggesting the LTTE’s involvement in the attack. A President who cut short a foreign tour, a Foreign Minister who rushed to the scene of violence, and a Media Minister who wants the international community to sign a treaty on the prevention of terrorism with special emphasis on the safety of sportsmen and sportswomen. Some media have even gone as far as to draw parallels between this attack and the infamous Munich Olympics. Cricket is our opium, and we are intoxicated.

Is there some way we can channel at least a bit of this concern towards the situation in the Vanni? Are we so inured, misled or confident that killing a Tamil children, women and men is inevitable or even necessary to decisively end the war against a larger enemy? Is this not the same perverse logic the LTTE employs, to date, and with disastrous consequences? In a bid to secure peace, must we become in form and action that which we revile in order to defeat it? And if we must become less than democratic in our response to terrorism, what guarantee is there of democracy’s quick and full restoration after war?…”

Read the full article here

Internet, before it becomes an illusion

Thursday, March 12, 2009 – 10:25 am

Sanath Siriwardena writes in Daily News, March 11, 2009 as follows:

Sri Lanka needs a national policy for Internet

“…Broadband is so important and vital, and could play an effective role in the developing process.

This is the reason why most countries in the world have taken interest to develop standalone policy for broadband Internet. Therefore we should not mix up the broadband policy with the formal ICT policy because these two varies widely.

Sri Lanka needs a national policy for Internet. It is an exactly a policy for High Speed Broadband Internet (HSBB) that carries our country forward based on the platform of data networks…”

Operators’ ad hoc standardising adversely affects economy

“…It is as if the authorities have ignored the presence of broadband in the country. No standard was ever published and broadband operates are in an ad hoc basis.

Usually operator will decide and finalise the standards in broadband services. The impact this has caused on the economy is enormous. All three vital components in broadband; price, quality and coverage does not seems to be in favour of the public.

Latest technologies have deployed to provide Internet at faster speeds exceeding megabits. But achieving these advertised speeds to the Internet is a mirage. The word ‘high speed’ and the phrases like ‘very very fast’ were used frequently to describe nominal broadband Internet by taking the fullest advantage of an absence of an advertising watch-dog authority in the country.

Rural areas in the country are left behind by the authorities. Most tele-centers served in rural areas that provide Internet connectivity to villages, operate using low bandwidth services below 128kbps which is inadequate in all aspects. If one believes speeds as low as 128kbps could fulfill the requirements of IT in the country, it would be the biggest mistake we ever make…”

Read the full article here.