General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPro-Gun Blogger Retaliates Against Database By Publishing Newspaper Staff’s Personal Info
The publisher and staff of The Journal News in New York state found themselves the subject of what hackers call a dox on Thursday, after a blogger retaliated against their database of gun permit holders by publishing an extensive list of personal information for dozens of people connected to the paper.
The list includes items like hobbies of staffers who werent involved in producing the story, phone numbers, email addresses and even home addresses. Links to social media accounts even featured photos of the editors children, which the blog actively promoted.
Appearing on CNN Thursday morning, blogger Christopher Fountain of the For What Its Worth blog said he was offended that the paper would release public information about gun owners and said he wanted the publisher of The Journal News to understand why hes so upset. I just thought they were being hypocrites, he said.
The papers publisher, Janet Hansson, offered a defense on Wednesday of her decision to run the article, telling Politico: We knew publication of the database (as well as the accompanying article providing context) would be controversial, but we felt sharing information about gun permits in our area was important in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings.
MORE...
Raw Story (http://s.tt/1xI38)
msongs
(69,837 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)The information on the Publisher and staff is, like the permit holders' info, all a matter of public record.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)The other aspect to this is the ongoing contributions to the data. Its almost like crowd sourcing.
LARED
(11,735 posts)derby378
(30,252 posts)And now this shit happens.
I do not condone what this blogger did, but I don't condone publishing that first map, either.
frylock
(34,825 posts)women who were under protective order and in hiding are emailing THIS guy? really?! never heard of him up until today. is he cause celebre in Connecticut?
Robb
(39,665 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
NickB79
(19,547 posts)You'd have to become a shut-in to "steer clear" of all gun owners. You'd be lucky to make it off your block.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)The more I am able to steer clear the better able I am to reduce the odds that one of them may kill me.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Turbineguy
(38,219 posts)but three do.
Initech
(101,485 posts)I've been actively fighting back against the gungeon but the newspaper pulled a dick move and so did this guy. They're both disgusting as far as I'm concerned.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)Why not let the data be used by citizens to steer clear of their armed neighbors.
Robb
(39,665 posts)or their families will be threatened or even really hurt by some insane gun owner.
The bill that outlaws the firearm used will be named after them.
Pardon the pun, but the gun advocates can't help but shoot themselves in the feet. For no matter how many might seem reasonable, their ranks are awash in paranoid idiots.
Bookmark this post.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)about their employer. Be interesting to see how loud the squeal.
The data being accumulated and published is quite thorough and has many parties looking. The staff is going to be unhappy for a long time to come.
Robb
(39,665 posts)I hope at least you are a professor.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Last edited Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:30 PM - Edit history (1)
They post public information that causes people problems, they should be willing to endure similar treatment. If that is intimidation, so be it. They may more closely consider their actions in the future.
Robb
(39,665 posts)Quite a feat, over the internet, but you've done it.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Why anyone should express surprise over this is curious. Other media outlets have done similar things and had similar results. Even other journalists are criticizing this as bad journalistic ethics.
Its not like journalism is a real profession. There are no enforced standards or even rules. Pegler was given a Pulitzer Prize is a case in point.
This is a classic case of the media behaving badly and getting a small measure of comeuppance for it.
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)And you suddenly like standards and rules, do you, Professor?
Once again, public information is public.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)And those that sow the wind, reap the whirlwind...
In several places, there are those arguing directly or obliquely that the media gets a free pass when they do this kind of thing. They argue journalism has its standards or that intimidating the press is a bad thing.
Piazza Riforma
(94 posts)Thought the "but he did it too!" excuse ended in elementary school but sadly, it appears I'm wrong. It seems that Christopher Fountain got in touch with his inner 8 year old and listened to his advice.
Then again who actually expects a pro-gun blogger to be the bigger man?
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)willing. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
There are some indications that the employees are starting to feel the backlash.
Piazza Riforma
(94 posts)a person who calls themselves a "professor" arguing in favor of schoolyard childishness or that they revel in it.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)remedy under law, this kind of backlash is the only alternative.
This is not the first time the media has done this kind of thing nor the first time there was a backlash. They had to know it was coming, but they claim their purpose was a noble one. In that case they knowing accepted what is coming now, may they enjoy the fallout.
I have no respect for the media or journalism. Haven't for quite some time. It is not a profession in any real sense of the word. They are not special, they are not noble, they are at best hacks.
Piazza Riforma
(94 posts)not only revel in but actively support whiny baby temper tantrums is disturbing.
So because there is no law against what they did you think it's groovy to make your own?
How sad.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)If a group chooses to publish public data that offends some people, they should expect similar treatment. Even the Brady Bunch never went as far as the Westchester Journal News.
Do you think what the Journal News did was OK? Was the blogger also OK? Please show how one is noble and the other evil.
If you think both are evil, what should have been done to the Journal News? What laws would you propose to stop it from happening again. What kind of punishment should the Journal News experience today? punishment would you meet out to the blogger?
In the end there has to be equality in both the law and public treatment. The media does not get some sort of free ride, and they aren't in this case. I expect the backlash will have economic consequences for the paper and the parent company. People will lose their jobs, some due to their personal bad judgement, others because the Journal News leadership used bad judgement. I feel for the latter.
State of California calls me a Professor too.
Piazza Riforma
(94 posts)Neither is what this guy did. This is not "righting a wrong".
Personally, I'm against any release of personal information without a warrant or court order.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)personal info of every other reporter who didn't work on the story is a good thing?
Really- links to pics of her children? This is abhorrent.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)When you publish public information that many think should be kept private, there is a backlash. This is not the first time this has happened to a paper. Other journalists are saying it was a bad thing to do without the backlash. The Journal News leadership had to know this would be coming.
There is no law in place to stop either the newspaper or the blogger. In the end the newspaper will back off. The price being paid economically (loss of subscriptions, advertiser boycotts, etc) plus the price being paid by their employees will force the issue.
Like I said, don't mess with the geeks, the net has no mercy.
Response to Purveyor (Original post)
Post removed
lynne
(3,118 posts)- public information is just that and if one group can publish it, so can another.
To publish sensitive information - even if public - about one group of people is inviting a similar reaction. What's good for the goose is good for the gander and all that stuff.
If someone wants to pull the pants down on somebody else, they'd better make sure their own underwear are clean first.
Piazza Riforma
(94 posts)Apparently that lesson hasn't quite filtered down to the masses yet.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)are clearly a danger to our lives and the lives of our family. We should have the right to know where they live and exactly what weapons they have
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)LARED
(11,735 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)The Yellow Star
By Jennifer Rosenberg, About.com Guide
The yellow star, inscribed with the word "Jude," has become a symbol of Nazi persecution. Its likeness abounds upon Holocaust literature and materials. But the Jewish badge was not instituted in 1933 when Hitler came to power. It was not instituted in 1935 when the Nuremberg Laws stripped Jews of their citizenship. It was still not implemented by Kristallnacht in 1938. The oppression and labeling of the Jews by use of the Jewish badge did not begin until after the start of the Second World War. And even then, it began as local laws rather than as a unified Nazi policy.
***snip***
The Nazis rarely had an original idea. Almost always what made the Nazi policies different was that they intensified, magnified, and institutionalized the age-old methods of persecution.
The oldest reference to using mandatory articles of clothing to identify and distinguish Jews from the rest of society was in 807 CE. In this year, Abbassid caliph Haroun al-Raschid ordered all Jews to wear a yellow belt and a tall, cone-like hat.1
But it was in 1215 that the Fourth Lateran Council, presided over by Pope Innocent III, made its infamous decree. Canon 68 declare
Jews and Saracens [Muslims] of both sexes in every Christian province and at all times shall be marked off in the eyes of the public from other peoples through the character of their dress.2
http://history1900s.about.com/od/holocaust/a/yellowstar.htm
Now I am seriously doubting that you want 80,000,000 gun owners in our nation to be required to have tattoos on their foreheads or to wear armbands.
But I will advise you that many lurkers come to DU to understand how Democrats feel about current issues just as some DU members go to conservative websites such as FreeRepublic to read the foolish comments often posted there.
A comment such as yours might cause some to believe that the liberal and progressive folks who post here are willing to discriminate against those who disagree with their views.
I realize that you are emotionally upset at the recent massacres in schools and theaters and that is entirely understandable. I own firearms but I had a nightmare about the shooting at the school in Connecticut last night and I rarely have bad dreams. We do need to have an honest discussion on gun violence in our nation and if we all show at least some respect for those who disagree with us we might actually make some progress in addressing this issue.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)If they don't respect others' privacy, why should theirs be respected? If this little tit-for-tat makes them uncomfortable for a while, they can't say they didn't ask for it.