A little while ago I blogged about the FTC and bloggers (HERE). I drew little response, although Kad Barma suggested I was being a little paranoid.
Now comes Blogger Ann Althouse commenting on an item in The Blog of LegalTimes. The good Law Professor titles her item with a claim from Mary Engle, associate director for advertising practices at the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection—"We are not planning on investigating individual bloggers."
As one Commenter noted: "Trust us. We're from the government, and we're here to help."♠
Regards — Cliff
♠ I think this is a lift from President Reagan.
3 comments:
I recall the commentary and also that I wasn't ready to comment because it was still unsure to what extent the FTC was going to go.
I do disagree with Kad Barbma's suggestion that you are being paranoid. There is more than enough anecdotal evidence that Big Brother is already hard at work sifting through our textual communications, and very likely those of a telephonic nature as well.
While the smooth silvery tongues of the Federal juggernaut give us honey dripping assurances that we can "trust me" we've been tricked before.
Some time ago, Cliff and I...and several others as I recall....had a running discussion about the impact of special interest groups on our daily life as a nation. I harken back to that discussion to point out that, as always, the Federal government, in all its vastness and omnipotence, NEVER does anything that doesn't serve the desired end state of special interest groups, many of whom prefer anonimity.
Given the preoccupation with absolute control that characterizes the current admininistration (itself being a "special interest group) I think the man on Main Street would be at once both shocked and outraged with the depth and extent of the intrusion of Big Bama Brother intrusion into our lives.
..And the whole accountability issue is germane in the "Future of Media" debate. I think when people present an old-fashioned print media v. blogs argument it's a false choice, because no one ever said blogs were going to replace print media entirely, or that blogs were somehow *better.* (Even bloggers don't say this, and I think most admit what they're adding is commentary and issue-raising, not the shoe-leather gumshoe stuff).
But back to the point -- I like the fact that for-profit media is subject to libel laws, because it means they're going to think twice before they say there were flies in the soup at a restaurant or bedbugs under the mattress at a hotel.
An individual person with shallow pockets, whether opining in a cafe or writing on a blog, doesn't have that problem.
I love blogs for what they are, but the twin factors that keep drawing me back to for-profit media are their resources (remember, they can stake out a six-figure do-nothing appointee, an individual blogger presumably cannot) and their accountability.
..And as a not-for-profit, part-time blogger, I'm quite happy that I'm lawsuit free (for now..)
I thought this post was about Arianna Huffington and her mistaken views on the office of the Vice President?
Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment