A recent post on Neil Kramer’s blog, Citizen of the Month discusses the rather controversial Blog With Integrity group/movement and its associated badge.
While obviously sparked by the FTC ethics edict requiring full disclosure of paid or sponsored articles. The mainstream press appears to describe Blog With Integrity (henceforth referred to as BWI to save wear on my fingers) as a “mommy blogger” group. Given my previous rant on sexism, and how anti-male sexism is not only ignored but in some cases accepted and praised, this is the first reason I have for distancing myself from the current Blog With Integrity group. And I will admit it is not a reason I am particularly proud of.
The second issue has to do with the use of the loaded phrase “intellectual property” as quoted here:
I believe in intellectual property rights, providing links, citing sources, and crediting inspiration where appropriate.
A clearer explanation of exactly which laws are being referred to would make this portion of the pledge much easier to understand and not play quite as neatly into the hands of those who are trying to turn things like copyright into perpetual ownership instead of a time-limited grant of exclusivity as was originally intended. I am guessing the BWI pledge mainly refers to copyright and trademark, as I don’t see how a blog post could infringe a patent. I wrote to the contact e-mail given for BWI on 2009-07-23, even citing the Free Software Foundation’s “words to avoid” page and have received no response so far.
Finally, the third issue is with these words in the pledge:
I always present my honest opinions to the best of my ability.
On its face this doesn’t seem evil, but do we really need to pledge to be honest? How much trust do I really gain by actually taking this pledge? Either people believe I am honest person or they don’t. And I must admit that my situation is a bit different: some are willing to say I am dishonest simply because of certain events in my distant past, that speak much more of who I was then versus who I am now.
I agree with the essence of Neil’s arguments, and in particular, this paragraph which I quote here (slightly edited for language):
As much as I respect the sentiments, I hope this badge doesn’t become too popular. I would hate to see a two tier system on the blogosphere, where one person displays a badge of integrity, like a preacher carrying the Holy Book for all to see, while the rest of us are branded as lying heathens in Sodom, [getting intimate with] goats. Isn’t the logical conclusion — the hope of the promoters — that marketers will notice this badge and work with those displaying it? Do we really want that to happen? Ask Sophia’s parents about life in the Soviet Union, when people had to take pledges before getting jobs and apartments.
Indeed, the thought that one segment of bloggers is “holier” than the rest of us for taking the pledge doesn’t sit well with me. Like Neil, I think it is enough that I earn the trust of my readers by my words, not by taking a pledge.
I have always welcomed civil feedback on what I write, on both of my blogs (soon to become “all three of my blogs” in the next month or so). I will usually even publish comments from those that disagree with me.
Hi and thanks so much for your feedback. No doubt someone will get back to you shortly on your email – it's been a busy week!
As one of the originators of BWI I can assure you it's not a "mommy blogger" movement except for the fact that the four of us happen to be mothers. We also happen to be writers who care deeply about the blogosphere and the negative aspersions often cast on us.
The spirit of the website is entirely benevolent – it's less regulatory than it is educational, and probably less educational than it is introspective. I've been so delighted seeing bloggers who never before considered their own policies about transparency now doing so, even so far as writing their own promises – to themselves – on their own blogs. I've been delighted to see those who naiively had ethical transgressions email us asking for guidance and looking for help to do things better. Or to rethink the degree to which they copied full posts instead of paraphrasing.
The best of what bloggers can do is lift one another up and inspire each other through dialogue and support. That's our only hope. Line in the sand? Holier than thou? Soviet-style caste system?
Bah. Not my style.
I wrote the e-mail at least a few days prior to reading Neil's post, so it's a bit out of date compared to what I posted here.
However, the one constant between that e-mail and my post is the issue of the use of the ambiguous and loaded term "intellectual property" which you have neatly sidestepped. Maybe someone should comment here on why the originators of BWI chose that term instead of specifically stating copyright and/or trademark law as appropriate?
Great question Shawn. it's not a legal document. And so, we stayed away from "copyright" and 'trademark" language because we're not a legal governing board. Intellectual property is the term used by most bloggers to widely convey an "all of the above" sort of reference to ideas and content. In the blog world–particuarly with personal bloggers who identify as part of a community–I believe there's a certain level of respect we afford one another based on common decency and courtesy, and not law. That's what we were going for.
BWI isn't intended to please all of the people all of the time. If it's not relevant for you, so be it. But glad that it's gotten a conversation going.
"Intellectual property" is also a vague and misleading term that plays into the hands of large corporations like Disney, Microsoft, Apple, etc. that want copyright to last forever instead of a long but limited time.
The problem with "all of the above" terminology is that it begs the question "all of what?" I feel like it makes no more sense to lump copyright in with other laws that are just different enough to be confusing than it would make to lump together motor vehicle, boating, aviation, etc. under "transportation laws" and refer to them as a group. One example of the potential for confusion: the concept of right of way is completely different for boats versus motor vehicles on land (on a boat right of way includes the *obligation* to maintain course and speed).
Hey, I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis and for the most part, people lack substance but, I just wanted to make a quick comment to say GREAT blog!…..I”ll be checking in on a regularly now….Keep up the good work! :)
I’m Out! :)