Censorship, freedom of expression, truth, proof and all that malarkey

I was just browsing blogs: one was lamenting the fact that she had to remove a blog because her employers gave her a formal reprimand after she made comments about them on it.

OK, blogging is a little like writing a diary, but it isn't. It may feel like a private space, but it's open to public view, so you should have to be responsible about what you write. I don't think you should have free rein to slag off employers, companies, or individuals. You may think/know you're just being honest, but it's all subjective and readers have only your word for it. Unless you back your claims up.

There can be comeback on what you write, and I think rightly so. There's freedom of speech/expression and there's truth & proof. Somewhere these things should meet.

Most of us have the sometimes unfounded belief that we're in the right in certain situations, when perhaps we're not. We're all fallible and we all have personal biases. Except for me, obviously! :P

Surely it's common sense not to name (or describe so as to be identifiable) people or organisations that you have a grievance with, if you're just having a rant about them? If you can back up your claims and are ready/willing for a formal confrontation, that's one thing, but if you're simply mouthing off it'd be better to keep it vague. Or better yet, keep it to a phonecall or private IM conversation with someone you know. I think if you have a beef with someone, but couldn't say it to their face, you'd be better not putting it on-line either. Countless times on my ex-forum, people had to change user names or got upset because someone they knew started reading their posts and weren't too happy with what they saw. It's a smaller world than we think. :D

So how does this mesh with my take on Gina Ford's little débacle? (Glad you asked. 8) :P)

I think it's the nature of the format.

Think of it this way, say, I posted an entirely innocuous and fair entry about ZXrr'pptt (hopefully an entirely imaginary name :D. Especially given its ease of pronunciation! :P), and someone posted something highly offensive: a malicious lie or derogatory statement about ZXrr'pptt in the comments part of my blog. I think it would be legitimate & reasonable for ZXrr'pptt to ask me to remove such a comment from my blog, (if I didn't do so off my own bat), and I would happily oblige.

I wouldn't like to be asked to remove my own entry on the subject as well, if inoffensive, or indeed my whole blog on the basis of the offensive comment.

Of course, as a blogger I can pre-moderate comments, if I like, with ease and I can check comments regularly since I get so few! (Not that I'm bitter! ;) :D) On a much larger scale, it just isn't manageable without a constant monitoring presence.

The BBC message boards engage pre-moderation on some of their boards, or certain posters, but it is quite a slow & clumsy tool and it interferes with the flow of discussion. After all, if you post something in answer to a post but there are several responses queuing for moderation before yours, you may find that by the time your reply gets through, the debate has changed course, or you seem to be merely repeating someone else.