“We believe that her credibility in her position as senior editor for Middle Eastern affairs has been compromised going forward.”
from Mashable! by Vadim Lavrusik
In a recent article, Michael Arrington, writing for TechCrunch, argues that journalists should openly express their opinions and biases, despite the longstanding idea that journalists should hide their political biases. This argument by Arrington comes on the heels of CNN’s firing of Octavia Nasr because of a controversial tweet and the forced resignation of Helen Thomas because of her statements about Israel. “I think journalists have the right to express their opinions on the topics they cover,” he writes. “More importantly, I think readers have a right to know what those opinions are.”
Some have called it a license to steal. To others, the recent Viacom v. YouTube court decision was no less than a trumpet heralding the protection of free speech on the Internet. And yet to a third contingency, Manhattan federal judge Louis Stanton’s decision was really an exercise in high-minded legal theory.
Regardless of your outlook on the case, it is clear that the decision was a key step in addressing one of the hottest issues currently affecting the media — protecting copyrights on the Internet. The case pitted two of the modern Internet user’s best friends against one another: entertainment producers (Viacom) versus programming distributors (YouTube, which is owned by Google). Hanging in the balance is the future of video on the Internet.
My latest Guardian column, “Canada’s copyright laws show Britain’s digital legislation is no exception,” explores the comparative histories of the awful UK Digital Economy Bill (rammed through Parliament with no real debate using dirty procedural tricks) and Canada’s new Bill C-32, a proposed law that ignores the thousands of Canadians who weighed in on the government’s copyright consultation, creating a prohibition on breaking “digital locks,” even when no copyright infringement takes place.
from Mashable! by Jolie O’Dell
from Berkman Center Newsfeed
Over the past few days the rumor mills have been buzzing as news emerged that Google is working on a potential ?Facebook killer?. This comes only days after we published about Facebook?s search strategy which could eventually become a direct competitor to Google. One thing is increasingly clear: this year could soon shape up to be more about Facebook versus Google in contrast to last year?s ?Facebook versus Twitter? theme.
The alleged Russian spy ring is a pleasant summer distraction (Anna Chapman — call your agent!) and a wonderful opportunity to use the phrase femme fatale. But if you want to ponder a 21st-century intelligence puzzle this July 4 weekend, turn your attention to cyber-espionage — where our adversaries can steal in a few seconds what it took an old-fashioned spy network years to collect.
Search for the Muslim Brotherhood on Facebook, and you’ll probably find little more than an unofficial community page whose members barely exceed 120 — although, amusingly, one of them happens to be somebody posing as Tariq Aziz, Saddam Hussein’s former deputy. (For the record, “Aziz” likes to read the Quran and his favorite film is a 1991 Indian romantic drama called “Godfather.”) From its absence on Facebook — one of the largest social networks on the planet with over 400 million users — the Muslim Brotherhood would seem to have a pretty feeble Web strategy.
from Boing Boing by Xeni Jardin
Facebook, LinkedIn and MySpace dominate the social networking landscape but there are many people looking for a more relevant place to digitally network.