Categories
Mediawatch

Facebook's Fine

Some guy gets fined €500 under the Press Act for having commented that the pope should be shot through the hands and feet in order to feel closer to Jesus. This declaration was made within the “confines” (that’s sarcasm guys) of a facebook group called “No to the Pope in Malta”.

The charge was of incitement under the Press Act. Some people including, surprisingly, defence lawyer Owen Bonnici, argue that the publication in question (a Facebook entry) is not made in Malta but wherever Facebook has opted to have as a place of abode. What rubbish. We have repeated time and time again that the important thing with regard to publications is not where the site is registered but where it can be read. Hence anything you write on public forums/sites/comment boards etc is liable to be subject to Maltese law for the simple reason that it can be read on a computer in Malta.

My gripe is more on the issue of “incitement” than anything else. the police must have received a complaint and proceeded thereupon – they are not so much to blame. My worry is how far do we define this incitement and with what limits. For one thing it would be evident to any reasonable minded individual that Karl Farrugia’s comment regarding the perforation of the papal limbs with projectiles is surely not in the same league of seriousness as, let’s say, a loony rightist leader’s intimation of the use of violence methods for the expulsion of immigrants.

I believe that neither in the case of Karl nor in the case of the (fictitious) loony leader are we confronted with an equivocal statement as that uttered by Henry II. History leads us to believe that speaking of Becket Henry said “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest”. In actual fact it went more like this:

“What miserable drones and traitors have I nurtured and promoted in my household who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric!”

Four knights – Reginald Fitzurse, Hugh de Morville, Willieam de Tracy and Richard le Breton – overheard the regent’s appeal and took him to his word. They found Becket in Canterbury cathedral and brutally murdered him. The King lived to regret this deed while the four knights ended up being excommunicated for their troubles. In any case their interpretation of the royal despair as some form of command might be forgiven. Whether we should think that Karl Farrugia’s exhortation is an invitation in the manner of Henry II is something I doubt very much.

Enrique II de Inglaterra
Image via Wikipedia

True, people should be more aware of the consequences of their utterings and postings on such tools as facebook but surely no one in his right mind would believe that Karl Farrugia’s statement was meant to be taken literally?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Categories
Mediawatch

Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox – the Sunday quotes

Some time ago J’accuse commented on how Bondi’s programme Bondiplus represented the death of investigative journalism. Only last week we pointed out the incongruency of the next programme planned by Lou – with Norman Lowell as guest. So. Is it still Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox? Hardly. Here’s what was said in the press today:

The day after last Monday’s show, when people were aghast in that very ‘what was Bondi thinking’ sort of way, disturbed by the exposure he was given, seeing it as some sort of incitement to racial hatred, I on the other hand seemed unable to fathom what all the fuss was about. Lowell worries me as much as Mary Poppins does. The only worrying thing about last Monday’s programme was that we were hardly going to be in for any surprises and we certainly were not going to hear anything we hadn’t already heard before. – Mikela Spiteri (“Our very own inglorious basterd“, Times)

When you consider these factors, it’s not surprising to see why Bondi invited Lowell along during a period when the topic of immigration is not very topical. Put yourself in his shoes. You can root around for a relevant subject (preferably one that puts the Labour Party in a bad light and hasn’t already been done to death in previous editions), spend long hours carrying out tedious research, and then have a programme where people only wake up for the closing credits and Rod Stewart crooning away. Alternatively, you could invite Lowell, choose choice extracts from a book which has been published for years, make a quick photomontage of black icons, and let Lowell do the talking. You’d be guaranteed a much wider audience with minimal effort, and if it was audience survey week, you’d be in with a winner. Never mind the fact that you’re providing a visibility platform for someone who spouts obnoxious and criminal views. That’s just a tiny niggle to be ignored when you’re in the business of producing ‘Programmes People Watch’. I wonder if the earlier Bondiplus slogan ‘Ġurnaliżmu Fuq Kollox’ has been replaced. It would look like it. – Claire Bonello (“Chasing ratings, not respect“, Times)

This week, Lou Bondí decided to take a break from the sublime and descend to the ridiculous. This week’s Bondí+ treated us to a people-bashing session by Norman Lowell, wearing his cravat backwards. The arguments were as cohesive as a jigsaw puzzle with several bits missing. But it was unfair of Bondí to try to put words into Lowell’s mouth by dint of repetition. – Tanja Cilia (“Blank versus“, Times)

One wonders whether these assertions will be met with the usual wall of deafening silence. There were also reactions elsewhere. The Indy reports that the BA has issued a charge against PBS for the Bondiplus Norman Lowell programme:

The Bondiplus programme led to mixed reactions and many heated discussions online, particularly on Facebook, with some arguing that the right to free speech should also include Mr Lowell’s right to express his beliefs, while others pointed out that his racist views were tantamount to incitement to hatred of specific groups, and therefore illegal. Other viewers felt that the programme only served to ridicule Mr Lowell, thus neutralising any potential influence he may have on viewers. While there were those who admitted they merely watched the programme “for a laugh”, there is real concern that Lowell’s followers are increasing in number, especially among the younger age group. (Independent)

Meanwhile Lou has been providing his guru expertise to the MZPN. Here’s a link to a pre-UK election discussion where Lou and Refalo discuss the extreme dangers of unstable government. MZPN Vid on FacebookReblog this post [with Zemanta]

It’s another we told you so moment for J’accuse. As Chris would say: we’re doing the I told you so dance… all over again.

Categories
Mediawatch

The Strongest Link

While we are on the subject of links here are two blogs from the UK Big League that featured J’accuse this week.

Iain Dale – writer, speaker, broadcaster and politician – gave J’accuse a mention on his blog’s feature “the Daley Dozen” on Wednesday. Here is an extract from Dale’s bio:

Iain Dale is one of Britain’s leading political commentators, appearing regularly on TV and radio. Iain is best known for his political blog, Iain Dale’s Diary and football blog, West Ham Till I Die. He is a contributing editor and columnist for GQ Magazine, writes for the Daily Telegraph and a fortnightly diary for the Eastern Daily Press. He was the chief anchor of Britain’s first political internet TV channel, 18 Doughty Street.com and is a presenter on LBC Radio. He appears regularly as a political pundit on Sky News, the BBC News Channel, Newsnight, Radio 4 and Radio 5 Live. He is the publisher of the monthly magazine, Total Politics and the author or editor of more than twenty books. He is managing director of the new book publisher, Biteback Publishing.

Yep a Tory AND a Hammer… still, he did appreciate our critique of his Telegraph article (internet elections) – enough to grant J’accuse a second appearance on the Daley Dozen.

Then there was Charles Crawford, fresh from his latest encounter with the darker side of Maltese blogging. The former FCO diplomatic servant and speechwriter now blogs regularly at charlescrawford.biz and has had a scrape with the Maltese net media thanks to the Conspiracy Theory of the Foreign Consultant. Crawford revised his blog post Malta’s Dramatic Blogosphere to include a reference to both Blogs of Malta and J’accuse.

Not bad for a week of links. Who said netiquette is not useful?

Categories
Mediawatch

The Digital Election

Still observing the UK Election from the Web angle. J’accuse brings you another possible tool – direct Q&A with the leaders. Of course this entails meeting the leaders of the political parties and that means that they have to accept answering questions but just look at what the use of Youtube and Facebook combined manages to contribute to an election debate.

The Youtube page in question is Ukelection, and there you will find that following a poll with Youtube and Facebook users, a set of questions were put to the three UK party leaders — Brown, Cameron and Clegg. Their answers were available for all to see, compare – and significantly – vote upon.

You can visit the Youtube site now and see the result.This was the original promo ad for the debate.

and here is a sample answer – chosen by biased j’accuse: Nick Clegg commenting on the electoral system:

Categories
Mediawatch

Facebook the Law

Prompted by Pots we look at two recent US opinions on the judiciary and facebook.