Media

Anonymous commenters, tell us your real names

Can anyone post anonymous comments to a website that is privately owned but operates publicly? When media companies provide a platform for online comments, usually at the end of news stories, can anonymous ones be barred when they are racist, hateful, vile, disgusting or uncivilized? The answer to both questions is yes. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment from government interference. But website owners can delete anonymous comments as they see fit. And they generally cannot be held liable for the content of third-party postings. But media companies are trying to identify and curb the small number of so-called online “trolls”’ who seem addicted to attacking anyone – the writers, authority figures and even each other on the same website. These trolls hide behind their anonymity and avoid taking responsibility for what they say.

Media

St. Louis SPJ event to focus on sports

In celebration of March Madness and the thrill of sports, the Society of Professional Journalists is presenting “March Madness: Covering the Wide World of Sports” for this month’s News at Noon speaker series in St. Louis, which takes place March 14 in the AT&T Room of the Missouri History Museum (co-sponsor of the event), located at 5700 Lindell Boulevard in Forest Park. A panel of veteran sports journalists will share the ins and outs of covering sports, and speakers will reveal how they got the best stories of their careers. The audience will get an insider’s view of the interviews, sports personalities and even behind-the-scenes anecdotes that never made it to print. From the stars of the high school playing fields, to college athletes, to World Series champions, our speakers have worked on the stories that have captivated our region’s sports fans.

Media

Pointing and clicking is not enough

AFP photographer Emmanuel Dunard’s photo of a praying Aline Marie at a Newtown, Conn., church brings up an issue where many photojournalists and members of the public disagree. Marie considered her praying outside the St. Rose of Lima church on the night of the shootings to be a private moment. She says she “felt like a zoo animal” when she realized that a number of photographers from across the nation and world were photographing her. In this and other similar circumstances, photojournalists often seem to think that a good photo trumps a person’s privacy. Accordingly, they often hide behind the “I’m shooting from a public space” rationale to justify their actions. But the “public space” position is a legal argument – and one that most members of the public either do not understand or with which they disagree.

Media

$1.2 billion defamation suit against ABC News pending, while BPI tries to get case back to South Dakota Court

Beef Products Inc., the South Dakota-based company suing ABC News for defamation, has asked that the case be returned to South Dakota state court and out of federal jurisdiction. The Jan. 17 article by Reuters, headlined “BPI wants ABC ‘pink slime’ defamation case back in state court,” reports that “BPI’s attorneys argued that a state court is the proper forum because the case also involves two related companies: BPI Technology Inc. and Freezing Machines Inc. that do business in South Dakota and are incorporated in Delaware. BPI and the two other entities are all owned by Eldon and Regina Roth.”