| about this site | who we are | site map | reading tips | teaching tips | student tips | build vocab | | teaching vocab | hot links | visit Thai school | Bangkok Post | student weekly | home

This column is for self-study or classroom use and gives guided help with reading the wide variety of writing styles and topics that appear as feature articles in the Bangkok Post. The lessons include background information, skill-building practice and vocabulary explanations. May 03, 2005 The blogger’s dilemma INTRODUCTION

Students If you’ve spent more than a few hours surfing the Internet — and that probably includes most of you — you’ve probably come across a “blog” at some point. The word blog originates from the longer term “weblog”, which is basically a website where an individual expresses his/or her opinions and shares their experiences with others. Today, blogging has become something of a craze with everyone from professional journalists to high school students putting their thoughts and news out there for all the world to see. Most blogs are fairly harmless and the better ones can actually be quite entertaining or even educational. Some high-profile bloggers get thousands of visits a day, putting them on a par with the readership of some big newspapers and magazines. The fun thing about reading or creating a blog is that it is not regulated by anybody, which basically means you can put anything on there you like. Many people say this is a good thing because it promotes freedom of speech, but it also has its downsides such as when blogs become offensive or promote hatred. Even with this relative freedom, however, bloggers are not above the law. With the proliferation of the Internet, judicial systems in many countries are now beginning to include laws to help prosecute people who violate their responsibilities on the World Wide Web. The argument for this goes that anything placed on the Internet is available for public viewing and should be subjected to the same laws as those covering other media such as newspapers, magazines and television. The story we have published in this week’s instant lesson looks at a case in the US where bloggers who were given secret information about a new Apple computer posted it on their blog sites. Apple is now trying to force the bloggers to reveal their sources, although many newspaper journalists believe that the bloggers should have the right not to reveal them. Read the story and discuss whether or not you agree with the bloggers and their press supporters or with Apple. Should bloggers be treated any differently from journalists (who do not have to reveal sources) or should both journalists and bloggers be forced to reveal sources if it is in the public interest? Remember to consider how much journalists rely on anonymous sources for their news stories. Without them, for example, some of the biggest scandals would never have been revealed. You might also consider whether the information on the Apple computer was revealed because it was in the public interest. Teachers This lesson is aimed at older students, including those at graduate level, who should find this topic an interesting one to discuss. All you have to do is photocopy the above information along with the article and let the students debate the issues once they have read to story. US press backs bloggers’ appeal More than a half-dozen news organisations are supporting three online journalists who published articles about a top-secret technology product that Apple Computer Inc. says was protected by trade secret laws. In December, Apple sued 25 unnamed individuals — presumed to be Apple employees — who allegedly leaked confidential product information to three people who run websites widely read by Apple enthusiasts. The Cupertino-based company said the leaks violated nondisclosure agreements and California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Apple then demanded that the online reporters’ Internet providers identify the leakers by turning over email records. The online reporters, or bloggers, sought to block the subpoenas, saying that identifying sources would create a “chilling effect’” that could erode the media’s ability to report in the public’s interest. Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg ruled in Apple’s favour last month, saying that reporters who publish “stolen property” aren’t entitled to protections. The online reporters then appealed. Now the mainstream media have weighed in. Eight of California’s largest newspapers and the Associated Press submitted a court brief asking that the online publishers be allowed to keep their sources confidential. The media companies said Kleinberg’s ruling, if upheld, could impair the ability of all journalists to reveal important news, from financial corruption to government cover-ups. Before demanding that the online publishers’ Internet provider turn over email records, the companies said, Apple should “exhaust all alternative sources” of identifying the source of the leaks. “Recent corporate scandals involving Worldcom, Enron and the tobacco industry all undoubtedly involved the reporting of information that the companies involved would have preferred to remain unknown to the public,” the 38-page brief stated. “Just because a statute seeks to protect secrecy of such information does not mean that the First Amendment protections provided to the news media to inform the public are wiped away.” Joining the brief were the Tribune Co.’s Los Angeles Times, Hearst Newspapers’ San Francisco Chronicle, Knight Ridder Inc.'s San Jose Mercury News, Copley Press Inc.'s San Diego Union-Tribune and Freedom Communications Inc.’s Orange County Register, as well as The McClatchy Co.’s Bee newspapers in Sacramento, Fresno and Modesto. Also supporting the brief were the California Newspaper Publishers Association and the non-profit free speech organisation California First Amendment Coalition. Apple spokesman Steve Dowling wouldn't comment specifically on the media companies’ brief but emphasised that Apple must protect its product secrets. “Apple’s DNA is innovation, and protection of trade secrets is crucial to our success,” Dowling said last week. Dave Tomlin, assistant general counsel for the AP, said the case has implications for bloggers, online reporters and traditional journalists. “For us, this case is about whether the First Amendment protects journalists from being turned into informants for the government, the courts or anybody else who wants to use them that way,” Tomlin said. “We believe strongly that it does, and that it's a good thing for all of us that journalists have this protection.” AP RACHEL KONRAD allegedly to have stated something as a fact but without giving proof leak to give secret information to the public, for example by telling a newspaper violate to go against or refuse to obey a law, an agreement, etc nondisclosure agreement document signed by employees to maintain secrecy on a delicate subject subpoena a written order to attend a court of law as a witness to give evidence appeal a formal request to a court of law or to somebody in authority for a judgement or a decision to be changed mainstream the ideas and opinions that are thought to be normal because they are shared by most people confidential meant to be kept secret and not told to or shared with other people impair to damage something or make something worse First Amendment part of the US constitution governing freedom of speech brief (noun) a legal case that is given to a lawyer to argue in court informant a person who gives secret information about somebody/something to the police or a newspaper

• This lesson was prepared by Neil Stoneham, an experienced secondary school teacher and trained journalist. Read our other learner centre columns here. Return to our home page. | © The Post Publishing Public Co., Ltd. All rights reserved 2005 | Last modified: May 03, 2005