Comments on Informed Comment: Cole/Weisberg Correspondence on Hitchens With Mr....

Defending Slate, sort of:While I find Weisberg's e...

2006-05-06T21:24:00.000-04:00

Defending Slate, sort of:

While I find Weisberg's evident lack of an editorial policy ("hey, whatever brings in readers") disappointing, the magazine is not too terrible. The law articles are good, if that's your bent, and the economics ones are OK sometimes, but the mag's real strength is the user interaction. If you have the patience for it, you find the gems in the "Fray" are worth the trek through the waste.

One dude bothers to track some of the better posts here. Judge for yourself.

K (gotta lose the picture)

This tells me all I need to know about the ethics ...

2006-05-06T16:17:00.000-04:00

This tells me all I need to know about the ethics and professionalism at Slate. I don't feel the need to ever visit the site again.

aiAh, well then. Perhaps this is why I stopped re...

2006-05-06T14:23:00.000-04:00

aiAh, well then. Perhaps this is why I stopped reading and using Slate as a reference some time ago.

Thanks for having your blog, Prof.

I must say I've always enjoyed reading Christopher Hitchen's work, but always with a nod and a wink. He is very amusing at times, generally at his own expense. I'm sorry for that, as he had potential to be great once.

You sir, Prof. Juan, are an invaluable and great patriot. Truth to power, sir. Truth to power.

Well. I keep Slate on my list of news sites, desp...

2006-05-06T14:22:00.000-04:00

Well. I keep Slate on my list of news sites, despite the occasional idiocy from Kaus and Hitchens. It's hard to do this, because I like reading Timothy Noah's Hot Document series, and there are a few really original columns out there, but I'm dumping Slate off my list of reads for now. I just don't have time to feed the trolls who feed Chris Hitchens, who is a fuckwit, especially if they can't be bothered to enforce some kind of integrity on the process. Why is Slate better than some random blog?

fabian, you must be a hardly-ever-right winger, yo...

2006-05-06T12:56:00.000-04:00

fabian, you must be a hardly-ever-right winger, you (purposely, i imagine) miss the point entirely in favor of the strawman "what's wrong with being a degenerative drunk?"

or else your comment might be incredibly subtle satire, i'm not sure.

as i've said elsewhere, i stopped using slate as a source for anything since they wrote a piece about blogging referencing my blog (in the title of their piece!) and not only not linking to it, nor even acknowledging it, but not even having the courtesy to answer my numerous emails asking them to do as much.

at least prof. cole got a response (probably 'cuz they smell lawsuit down the line!)

In the general climate of our culture, I am not su...

2006-05-06T12:44:00.000-04:00

In the general climate of our culture, I am not surprised that another example of lying, stealing, and general lack of ethical behavior it reaching our attention.

Slate's shallowness, as an online publication, especially highlighted when it is also broadcast on NPR, has been evident to me from my first visits. I go there, rarely, and mostly, to read Doonsbury.

Suing, for someone who has more important work to be done, informing us about Persian culture and language, seems to me, to be counterproductive. Professor, you have exposed the theft of your ideas, the lies of Hitchens, and the blatant disregard of his "editor."

That is sufficient to act as the perverbial stone in the pond, and the ripples will ripple back and forth on the Net, perhaps, amplifying what you originally wrote. This is action which has value to your ideas and to the debate about going to war with Iran. You are wise not to jump into a lawsuit.

I wonder what discredits Slate more. Having been a...

2006-05-06T12:19:00.000-04:00

I wonder what discredits Slate more. Having been a Microsoft production at inception or printing Christopher Hitchens's drunken ravings? Hmmm. Might be a toss-up.

Email is the property of the author of the email n...

2006-05-06T10:29:00.000-04:00

Email is the property of the author of the email not the property of the recipient (just as letters are the property of the author of the letter, not the recipient). One needs permission from the author of the correspondence in question to publish it, even if it is sent to a number of people in a private listserv. Just because words may be written in electronic form, doesn't mean anyone has the right to use them as they wish. Anything original one writes is under copyright as soon as it's in written form. That's why sometimes you see compiled letters to so and so, but you don't get to see the return letters, because they haven't received permission to publish them from the author of said letters. Electronic doesn't mean free. Obviously you know this already. Just wanted to make that point in support of you.

Juan Cole is right; Mr. Weisberg and Hitchens are ...

2006-05-06T09:53:00.000-04:00

Juan Cole is right; Mr. Weisberg and Hitchens are wrong, and I suspect Mr. Weisberg knows he is wrong. He is probably already talking to his lawyers.

Sorry to see this happen to you Juan Cole. I have enjoyed your informed articles, and you certainly do not deserve this.

Keep fighting the good fight,
Steven Joseph

The classic "sandbox" defense - If I put my finger...

2006-05-06T03:07:00.000-04:00

The classic "sandbox" defense - If I put my fingers in my ears real tight, I can't understand what you're saying, but I am trying...

Fabian- the trouble here with Hitchens is that he'...

2006-05-06T02:59:00.000-04:00

Fabian- the trouble here with Hitchens is that he's a fascist who really sucks as a writer even when he's sober- which is apparently not often enough. Other than that I have no problem with him. Cheers!

Mr. Weisberg,Are you saying you wouldn't fire some...

2006-05-06T02:24:00.000-04:00

Mr. Weisberg,

Are you saying you wouldn't fire someone at Slate who started forwarding Chris Hitchens' internal emails to Juan Cole?

What if they were your not-for-publication emails? Are you trying to claim you, or Hitchens have never said anything in an email you would be uncomfortable having published? I call Bullshit if so.

Calling it a listserv doesn't make it public domain. It's the difference between a conference call, and a public speech.

Whoever did this also succeeded in diminishing the value of the gulf2000 listserv as Professor Cole, and all other members of that list will no doubt either stop posting to it, or begin filtering what they say.

To that extent, the enemies of open discourse and free thought have won.

Bloody Hell, you Americans lefties are can be peda...

2006-05-06T00:28:00.000-04:00

Bloody Hell, you Americans lefties are can be pedantic puritans. Some of the best writers, commentators, journalists and progressive leaders in history love to drink and some have even been known to be alcoholic.

Australia's WW2 Labor prime minister John Curtain suffered that illness but didn't prevent the great Social Democrat from mobilising the entire nation to meet the Japanese advance in South East Asia while its most experienced soldiers were helping to hold the Nazi advance in North Africa and its airmen were assisting the Battle of Britain.

At the same time, Nazi tyrant Adolf Hitler was a fair dinkum teetotaler.

To 'woosh's point, at the bottom of every email a ...

2006-05-06T00:02:00.000-04:00

To 'woosh's point, at the bottom of every email a company I work for sends is this footer:

"Confidentiality
****************
The information contained herein is strictly proprietary and confidential and is intended solely for your exclusive use.

By accepting these materials, the recipient agrees to hold and treat the material contained herein in the strictest of confidence. Any dissemination, distribution, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the information contained herein is prohibited without the prior written consent of [redacted]"

I don't know how well this legalese would hold up in court.

Seems to me that Mr. Weisberg is conflating private email with published commentary.

To put it bluntly, Mr. Weisberg sees no ethical pr...

2006-05-05T23:56:00.000-04:00

To put it bluntly, Mr. Weisberg sees no ethical problem with Slate publishing a misleading article based on a purloined listserv message.

To put it bluntly, Mr. Weisberg sees no ethical problem with an action with serves his own agenda.

To put it bluntly, Mr. Weisberg cares neither for Slate's credibility nor another's privacy.

He is skirting the issue by calling Hitchens a com...

2006-05-05T22:33:00.000-04:00

He is skirting the issue by calling Hitchens a commentator. This is simple equivocation and has nothing to do with the issues surrounding how the material for Hitchens's article was procured. Commentators are bound by journalistic ethics also.

Crikey- is it any wonder that Fox News is the "mos...

2006-05-05T21:59:00.000-04:00

Crikey- is it any wonder that Fox News is the "most trusted" in a recent poll when you have a response from some gutless apparatchik at Slate refusing give any credence to Dr. Cole's complaint? Slate is, and will remain, garbage. But then, its goal is to Sell, Sell, Sell, not be a forum for substantive journalism. Sue the bastards, Juan! And take that nauseating drunken fascist Hitchens down too!

What part of "not to be taken off-list" (I paraphr...

2006-05-05T21:47:00.000-04:00

What part of "not to be taken off-list" (I paraphrase) does he not understand? If I were you, Dr. Cole, that would be the sum total of my next commentary, with lawsuit attached.

Alas, it may be now too lateTo grant us all a new,...

2006-05-05T21:19:00.000-04:00

Alas, it may be now too late
To grant us all a new, clean Slate
What's fair is foul, a sullen fate
To fall so low what once was great

+++

The Slate editor seems to believe that the sending...

2006-05-05T19:44:00.000-04:00

The Slate editor seems to believe that the sending an email is akin to putting something into the public domain.

Lawyers, accountants and others often put a lot of legalese at the end of their emails clarifying the opposite especially for those who errantly receive a wayward message.

Corporations have had to justify through the court system when its appropriate to peer into employee's email.

A closed mailing list with a non-disclosure agreement does present an ethical situation and pending any consequences described in the agreement possibly a civil case.

If one sent a personal letter to another, that is not the same as giving the copyright. The reciepient can quote from it and report on it, but technically cannot distribute it without getting the author's permission. But in this case, there seems to have been some sort of NDA in place to even stop that. In most cases, its not worth suing because no commercial damage is typically done with most email forwarding. However, if it includes unpublished work of commercial value then damages may be possible.

I think the one who passed on the email to Hitchens has the greatest risk of liability.

The ethics of Hitchens and the unnamed source, and even now the editor seems to be contrary to journalistic integrity.

Weisberg's simply a lazy editor -- or none at all....

2006-05-05T19:32:00.000-04:00

Weisberg's simply a lazy editor -- or none at all. Ethically bankrupt defending Hitchens. (Drinking buddies perhaps?)

More to the point:: There's a mole in your email discussion group. That's a problem with internet trust -- no one knows if you're a dog.

You're a public figure. Don't use the internet to publish something you wouldn't want to be made public and misinterpreted.

Alas, would it were different, would that frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump they little butts when they jump....

Bleh. I'm with you, Juan. And I happen to be an et...

2006-05-05T19:04:00.000-04:00

Bleh. I'm with you, Juan. And I happen to be an ethicist (unlike Weisberg)!

Don't be so quick to leave Slate, guys. Weisberg, ...

2006-05-05T19:01:00.000-04:00

Don't be so quick to leave Slate, guys. Weisberg, Kaus and Hitchens are the exception to the rule; besides where else can you find both sides of ANY argument in one place nowadays?
Hitchens is a drunken thug though. That much is obvious.

Wow, that is truly shocking. I mean, just absolut...

2006-05-05T18:55:00.000-04:00

Wow, that is truly shocking. I mean, just absolutely shocking.

No more Slate for me.

It seems to me that Slate is just a fancy blog. Yo...

2006-05-05T18:45:00.000-04:00

It seems to me that Slate is just a fancy blog. You can't get a subscription to a hardcopy version, can you?

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Sue 'em.