Voluntary Code for Blogs

Ah, I wondered how long it would take. Now it seems the knives are out:

Blogs and other internet sites should be covered by a voluntary code of practice similar to that for newspapers in the UK, a conference has been told.

Why? A reasonable man might ask.

But unless there was a voluntary code of conduct there would be no form of redress for people angered at content.

Ah… so that’s why. And why might people be angered? because some blogger has dared to call them on their views? Because, dare it be so, a blogger has pointed out that the angered person is an arrogant fuckwit? Or because a blogger has ripped someone’s dearly held convictions to shreds? Or because some impudent blogger has pointed out that our mainstream media lies and then lies about the lies?

While there is a wild west-like persona to the web, the sheer freedom of speech means that some feel threatened. However, the laws of libel still apply, so it is beholden on bloggers just as with their conventional counterparts to ensure that they speak the truth.

Mr Toulmin described the phrases “free speech” and “free press” as relative terms because views expressed on the internet are still governed by laws such as libel and data protection.

Well, quite… Isn’t that what I just said? Given this, why do we need a code of conduct? If someone has been libelled, they can demand a retraction and apology. They can, should they wish, resort to law – although suing someone who has little in the way of resource is a pointless exercise.

But apart from those sites, generally on the internet “there are no professional standards, there is no means of redress”, Mr Toulmin said.

Of course there is; I just mentioned it – it’s called the law of libel.

Former Downing Street spin doctor Alastair Campbell, who chaired the session organised by the Commission for Racial Equality, said blogs were “perceived as a positive development” but added that “some of the most offensive stuff” comes from them.

Who asked that prize tit for his tuppennyworth? I presume by “offensive” he means the stuff that usually pours forth in response to the latest authoritarian nonsense proposed by his erstwhile boss. Common abuse, however, is not covered by the laws of libel. Common abuse is mild compared to what he and his erstwhile cohorts deserve. Common abuse is something that allows I and others like me to let off a little steam. If a voluntary code means that I cannot call Blair, his sycophants on the government benches and the equally retarded fuckers on the opposition benches a bunch of conniving cunts, well, then I won’t be signing up to it.

Come to that, I won’t be signing up to it anyway.

Get used to it.