RSS FEED
MOST SHARED
- The Best Tax Plan: Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum?
- More MF Global Money Missing Than Originally Thought
- Greek Debt Saga Back on Center Stage for Markets
- Mick Fleetwood on the MP3 ‘Dumbing Down’ of Music
- To Play Senate Cybersecurity Bill, Cramer Likes Fortinet Stock
- Steelers' Antonio Brown Spends Super Bowl Week with Twitter Fan Turned BFF
- Why Cramer Likes Select Comfort Over Tempur-pedic Stock
- Special Feature: Wall Street History - How Wall Street Got Its Name
- Lightning Round: Trina Solar, Zoltek, Affymax and More
- To Play Senate Cybersecurity Bill, Cramer Likes Fortinet Stock
- How to Trade the Turmoil in Greece
- Cramer: 10 Earnings to Watch Next Week
- Your First Move For Monday February 13th
- 2012: The Year of the Stock Picker
- US Stocks Avoid Closing Down Over 1%, Again
- A King Dollar GOP?
Should You Ever Make Things Disappear?
Managing Editor, CNBC.com
Should you ever pull down posted material from a Web site?
It's a big debate at BoingBoing, a popular blog, according to The New York Times. Apparently a blogger there "unpublished" a bunch of posts about Violet Blue, a sex columnist and blogger. The readers of BoingBoing apparently don't approve.
This touches on an ongoing issue in Internet journalism ... pulling things down. Our technology lets us do that, if we desire. But the parameters of journalism argue against it. Once it's reported, it's reported. Could you "pull down" a newspaper article? Or a live interview on TV?
We get requests to pull down items from time to time. More often than not it is from a fellow journalist, which I find a little worrisome. And usually the request has more to do with vanity than substance ... like an awkward or unflattering interview. Sometimes it involves a mistake or stupidity, though.
You can understand the desire to make such things disappear. But that would be unfair to anyone who saw or read the piece earlier. You have to do something to signal the material wasn't right originally -- otherwise you weren't being straight up with your audience. Better to run a correction and take your lumps than engage in an Orwellian now-you-see-it-now-you-don't practice.
There might be exceptions ... something causing immediate harm to a person or company, for example. But it'd be a pretty extreme situation, I'd imagine.




