Debbie Frisch, a PhD in psychology and an instructor at the University of Arizona (a temporary position, not a tenure track job), set off an internet firestorm with some comments aimed at Jeff Goldstein, the host of Protein Wisdom. The lovely Dr. Frisch wrote, as Mr Goldstein put together in one post for us:
I’d like to hear more about your “tyke†by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke?Tell all, bro!
- And
[...] as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your “tyke†it wouldn’t slow me down one iota. You aren’t “human†to me.
[...]
So if you could just tell me the AGE and SEX of your “tyke,†I’d be stoked!
Thanx!
And
Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby.
Are you still married to the woman you humped to produce the toddler?
And
I reiterate: If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldn’t give a damn.
Patterico has been all over this one, with stories here, here, here, here and here. And Powerline, which gets more visitors than God, put forth a very minor statement — but a minor reference on Powerline gets you a lot of attention!
It has cost Dr. Frisch something, something big: not only did she see the need to apologize, but she felt the need to quit her job. She wrote:
-
I wrote some inflammatory comments at a blog by a guy named Jeff Goldstein called protein wisdom that infuriated many bloggers and commenters. Many of these bloggers emailed my boss at the University of Arizona to tell on me.
In hindsight, the things I wrote were over the line of nastiness. I apologize to Mr. Goldstein.
I have resigned from the University of Arizona so there is no need for other enraged people to write to administrators there. I am a temporary worker there and I am in Oregon for the summer.
Some blogs have posted comments that I perceive to be physically threatening. I have contacted the FBI and the Pajamas Media staff to determine how to proceed with this aspect of this unbelievable experience.
My intention in this post is to de-escalate the situation. The comments that started this all were nasty, not threatening. But I feel very threatened by the response.
Jeff – I lost my job. You won. Could you call off the troops?
Whether coincidentally or otherwise, Mr Goldstein’s site suffered a major denial of service attack at about that time; any comments he might have wished to make to defuse the situation were unavailable to readers.
Dr. Frisch was roundly criticized, by the left as well as the right. There was a bit of sniping that some of the commenters from the left weren’t quite as harsh in their condemnations as they could have been, and maybe that’s to be expected, but I consider that to be a relatively minor issue; other than a couple of wild-eyed leftists, Dr. Frisch received no support at all.
Other than commenting on Patterico and, once, on Dr Frisch’s site (as polite a comment as was possible, by the way, but her site doesn’t track individual comments), I might not have written an article about it, were it not for some other issues. Oliver Willis and The Liberal Avenger both ran stories in which it was claimed that the publication of a plaintiff’s family’s name and address by Stop the ACLU forced them to move. I thought blaming Stop the ACLU for the harassment the family faced to be a bit ridiculous; they were harassed by locals in the small Delaware town in which they lived (including their kids being harassed by other kids in their public school), and the locals didn’t need the national website to know who filed the offending lawsuit. But that doesn’t mean I think that it’s right for Stop the ACLU to be publishing that stuff, fully intending that the information be used to write or e-mail or telephone plaintiffs to harass urge them to drop the case.
Personal information published over the web, for the purpose of getting someone harassed or fired or ridiculed has been happening way too often; the episode I just mentioned was simply one of the last. And it’s come from both the right and the left, with the victims being on both the right and the left. No, I don’t care who did it first, nor do I care if one “side” is guiltier than the other; that just shouldn’t be done, period.
In thinking about this, I decided to see if there was some sort of Bloggers Code of Ethics available; after all, I can’t be the first person to think of such a thing! A Googleâ„¢ search returned a lot of hits, but not much really good information. The best I found was this:
- Some bloggers recently have been debating what, if any, ethics the Weblog community should follow. Since not all bloggers are journalists and the Weblog form is more casual, they argue they shouldn’t be expected to follow the same ethics codes journalists are. But responsible bloggers should recognize that they are publishing words publicly, and therefore have certain ethical obligations to their readers, the people they write about, and society in general.
CyberJournalist.net has created a model Bloggers’ Code of Ethics, by modifying the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics for the Weblog world. These are just guidelines — in the end it is up to individual bloggers to choose their own best practices. CyberJournalist.net follows this code and urges other Weblogs to adopt this one or similar practices.
Integrity is the cornerstone of credibility. Bloggers who adopt this code of principles and these standards of practice not only practice ethical publishing, but convey to their readers that they can be trusted.
A BLOGGERS’ CODE OF ETHICS
Be Honest and Fair
Bloggers should be honest and fair in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Bloggers should:
• Never plagiarize.
• Identify and link to sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.
• Make certain that Weblog entries, quotations, headlines, photos and all other content do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
• Never distort the content of photos without disclosing what has been changed. Image enhancement is only acceptable for for technical clarity. Label montages and photo illustrations.
• Never publish information they know is inaccurate — and if publishing questionable information, make it clear it’s in doubt.
• Distinguish between advocacy, commentary and factual information. Even advocacy writing and commentary should not misrepresent fact or context.
• Distinguish factual information and commentary from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
Minimize Harm
Ethical bloggers treat sources and subjects as human beings deserving of respect.
Bloggers should:
• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by Weblog content. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
• Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of information is not a license for arrogance.
• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
• Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
• Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects, victims of sex crimes and criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
Be Accountable
Bloggers should:
• Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
• Explain each Weblog’s mission and invite dialogue with the public over its content and the bloggers’ conduct.
• Disclose conflicts of interest, affiliations, activities and personal agendas.
• Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence content. When exceptions are made, disclose them fully to readers.
• Be wary of sources offering information for favors. When accepting such information, disclose the favors.
• Expose unethical practices of other bloggers.
• Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
I’d add a couple of things:
Other suggestions could certainly be made.
CyberJournalist.net’s attempt at a code of ethics didn’t really get very far. And while I’m just a small-potatoes blogger, I’m sending this to a few larger sites, including a couple involved in the Frisch dispute, as well as making it a RedState diary entry. Maybe some bloggers with more readership and more influence than I have can get something done.
I of course. completely support all the listed civilities. You do realize that were some of the more strident Left sites to follow the rules, they’d be almost totally silent. /snark off
BTW – The Charming Dr Demento Frisch is trying to run with a new prang to the effect that her posts were “played with”. She’ll have to try for another ploy, there were dozens of us on the PW site the 4th when she started in with her vicious diatribes, and they were all immediately forwarded, in all their vileness, to the Portland FBI AIC, complete with time stamps for their review. No time for mods as she’s trying to hint at. Unfortunately for her dysfunctional self, some of us are experienced in cyber stalkers.
That’s a nice post. I have one question, though. How might the code of ethics be extended to commentors? Most of the sites I visit that allow comments has at least one resident troll. Sometimes they are benign, but as your post points out, some come across as unhinged. While Frish has her own blog, the ethically challenged remarks from her were on Goldstein’s blog.
It strikes me that a similar set of codes should be posted by bloggers to apply to their commentors. Violating the code would, of course, invite banishment.
There is the issue of enforcement of codes overall (and past banishment). Is it enough to submit the violator to public ridicule? How could we, as a collective, manage enforcement without coming off as a group of internet vigilantes?
[...] Common Sense Political Thought [...]
Steve, I think it could be handled two ways:
1- The blog could have a “will delete” rule, posted as fair warning, for commenters who violate; or
2- The blog could note that commenters who violate the code of ethics would have their comments remain, and be subject to the scorn they deserve.
Such a code has to be voluntary; I don’t see how it could be enforced other than by scorn.
Perhaps the anonymity afforded by the web has allowed some folks lapse in the civility and comity that was long a hallmark of our political discourse.
There have been exceptions and some were a bit extreme in the original applications but may be appropriate in certain circumstances. A caning of Senator Kennedy might be a reasonable measure and I have ‘lifted’ a phrase once used against Henry Clay (He both shines and stinks, like a mackerel rotting in the moonlight) a time or two but always with attribution.
However, some bloggers never rise to the level of sophomoric and seem to be at the grade school level in the low quality of the invective.
It has been said that an armed society tends to be polite. A debate in which people use their real names may also be one where civility rules.
The Frisch attack on Goldstein – the latest news, along with other misc. blog notes
Here’s a refresher on what happened last week when a University of Arizona professor viciously attacked blogger Jeff Goldstein and his two year old son. If his site isn’t down from another Denial of Service attack, you should be able to re…
The Frisch attack on Goldstein – the latest news, along with other misc. blog notes
Here’s a refresher on what happened last week when a University of Arizona professor viciously attacked blogger Jeff Goldstein and his two year old son. If his site isn’t down from another Denial of Service attack, you should be able to re…
[...] Seen recently on a couple of sites, including Common Sense Political Thought This is originally from the Cyber Journalist but the site is currently down. It is making the rounds on a number of political blogs as a way of bringing civility to the discourse between differing view blogs. [...]
[...] Ethical blogging. A couple of days ago I blogged about the Debbie Frisch incident. Here is some more information on that:Common Sense Political Thought � Blog Archives � Blogging Code of Ethics: “Debbie Frisch, a PhD in psychology and an instructor at the University of Arizona (a temporary position, not a tenure track job), set off an internet firestorm with some comments aimed at Jeff Goldstein, the host of Protein Wisdom. The lovely Dr. Frisch wrote, as Mr Goldstein put together in one post for us:I’d like to hear more about your tyke by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke? Tell all, bro!”The blogger at Common Sense Political Thought wrote about the importance of a Blogging Code of Ethics and even added some to them. Emphasis is mine:A BLOGGERS’ CODE OF ETHICSBe Honest and FairBloggers should be honest and fair in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.Bloggers should:• Never plagiarize.• Identify and link to sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.• Make certain that Weblog entries, quotations, headlines, photos and all other content do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.• Never distort the content of photos without disclosing what has been changed. Image enhancement is only acceptable for for technical clarity. Label montages and photo illustrations.• Never publish information they know is inaccurate — and if publishing questionable information, make it clear it’s in doubt.• Distinguish between advocacy, commentary and factual information. Even advocacy writing and commentary should not misrepresent fact or context.• Distinguish factual information and commentary from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two. Minimize HarmEthical bloggers treat sources and subjects as human beings deserving of respect. Bloggers should:• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by Weblog content. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.• Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of information is not a license for arrogance.• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.• Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.• Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects, victims of sex crimes and criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges. Be AccountableBloggers should:• Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.• Explain each Weblog’s mission and invite dialogue with the public over its content and the bloggers’ conduct.• Disclose conflicts of interest, affiliations, activities and personal agendas.• Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence content. When exceptions are made, disclose them fully to readers.• Be wary of sources offering information for favors. When accepting such information, disclose the favors.• Expose unethical practices of other bloggers.• Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others. I’d add a few more things:Bloggers should never make reference to anyone else’s family unless such reference is a reasonable, non-harmful and non-insulting requirement for the story or comment. Bloggers should never publish the addresses or telephone numbers of anyone in an attempt to have that person receive unsolicited mail or calls. Bloggers should never return a violation of the code of ethics with a response that also violates the code of ethics. Other suggestions could certainly be made.I’d like to add my own point to this list.If you have comment boxes, it is imperative that you manage them, particularly if you are going to be absent for long periods of time. Amy Welborn does a wonderful job of this. She tells her readers that she is going to be away, and then she shuts her boxes down. For Halo scan users, I understand this can be more of a problem, but if it means taking the code out temporarily, then in my opinion that is the best thing to do. Failure to do so leaves you with a mess like this. Being absent isn’t an excuse for letting your forum turn into chaos. [...]