Comments on: Expunged? What Happens When A Blogger Decides To Remove Posts? http://madisonian.net/2008/07/15/expunged-what-happens-when-a-blogger-decides-to-remove-posts/ a blog about law, tech, culture, and related things Thu, 10 May 2012 20:32:56 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Deven http://madisonian.net/2008/07/15/expunged-what-happens-when-a-blogger-decides-to-remove-posts/comment-page-1/#comment-255762 Deven Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:28:59 +0000 http://madisonian.net/?p=1449#comment-255762 I have responded at length to Seth's comments at http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/07/expunged_what_h.html#comments I have responded at length to Seth’s comments at http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2008/07/expunged_what_h.html#comments

]]> By: Seth Finkelstein http://madisonian.net/2008/07/15/expunged-what-happens-when-a-blogger-decides-to-remove-posts/comment-page-1/#comment-255707 Seth Finkelstein Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:29:48 +0000 http://madisonian.net/?p=1449#comment-255707 See also a list of misreportings from <a href="http://www.tinynibbles.com/blogarchives/2008/07/the-accretion-of-little-things.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.tinynibbles.com/blogarchives/2008/07/the-accretion-of-little-things.html</a> See also a list of misreportings from

http://www.tinynibbles.com/blogarchives/2008/07/the-accretion-of-little-things.html

]]> By: Seth Finkelstein http://madisonian.net/2008/07/15/expunged-what-happens-when-a-blogger-decides-to-remove-posts/comment-page-1/#comment-255706 Seth Finkelstein Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:25:25 +0000 http://madisonian.net/?p=1449#comment-255706 This post is somewhat garbled, understandably so, since it's written by someone both outside the "community" and working from somewhat inaccurate information. 0) Some of the statements about only Xeni Jardin's work are not correct - a few posts were made by other bloggers, and at least one was entirely written by Violet Blue and just posted by Xeni Jardin. 1) The issue is <em>ethics</em>, not <em>law</em>. This has led to a lot of confusion. The New York Times would have a LEGAL RIGHT to remove, say, every article mentioning say "John Yoo" from its archives and never mention his name again. But it sure would be viewed as an unethical act. 2) There is substantial ... skepticism ... that certain statements made should be taken at face value, and opposed to being for media consumption. 3) The "Google value" aspect is not making it to the chattering-class. 4) There are important uissues of hypocrisy given that Boing Boing is such a widely read blog and also crusades for openness and transparency. This is again an <em>ethics</em>, not <em>law</em>. The best article covering the ethics issue is: <a href="http://www.zenarchery.com/2008/07/01/that-violet-blue-thing-boing-boing/" rel="nofollow"> http://www.zenarchery.com/2008/07/01/that-violet-blue-thing-boing-boing/</a> This post is somewhat garbled, understandably so, since it’s written by someone both outside the “community” and working from somewhat inaccurate information.

0) Some of the statements about only Xeni Jardin’s work are not correct – a few posts were made by other bloggers, and at least one was entirely written by Violet Blue and just posted by Xeni Jardin.

1) The issue is ethics, not law. This has led to a lot of confusion. The New York Times would have a LEGAL RIGHT to remove, say, every article mentioning say “John Yoo” from its archives and never mention his name again. But it sure would be viewed as an unethical act.

2) There is substantial … skepticism … that certain statements made should be taken at face value, and opposed to being for media consumption.

3) The “Google value” aspect is not making it to the chattering-class.

4) There are important uissues of hypocrisy given that Boing Boing is such a widely read blog and also crusades for openness and transparency. This is again an ethics, not law.

The best article covering the ethics issue is:


http://www.zenarchery.com/2008/07/01/that-violet-blue-thing-boing-boing/

]]>