media law

love vs Gordon & Holmes: Courtney Love and U.S.’s first Twitter libel trial

What is Twibel? :
Simply put, Twitter plus libel equals Twibel. Libel is the written form of defamation, where a false published statement harms the reputation of another.Twitter has made posting potentially defamatory content much easier. Coupled with the continued increase in Twitter use, it was only a matter of time before Twibel libel would enter the courtroom for legal interpretation.

Love hired Holmes' firm in late 2008 to pursue claims that attorneys and accountants had allegedly stolen money and other personal property from Cobain's estate, court records show.

But she later dropped the firm, partly out of dissatisfaction with its stipulation that she refrain from "abusing any and all substances for at least the remaining duration of their attorney-client relationship," according to the subsequent libel complaint filed by Holmes.

Love later tried unsuccessfully to rehire the firm, the complaint alleged. In June 2010, she responded to a question from another Twitter user by tweeting: "i was (expletive) devastated when Rhonda J Holmes Esq of San Diego was bought off ..."

Although the case was one of the first in which Twitter and libel law intersected, Lawrence said it was tried by the same rules as traditional defamation cases.Jurors decided that Love's tweet included false information, but the musician didn't know it wasn't true.

Holmes' attorney, Mitchell Langberg, said the jury's verdict meant the panel determined Love's statement was defamatory, but the singer couldn't be held liable for it. Holmes' side asked the panel to award $8 million in damages and send a message that false statements online had consequences.

The case makes me simply ask what do the remedies for defamation look like in the age of Twitter? How can we best encourage free speech while deterring defamatory speech on Twitter?

as well as If a goal of defamation is to strike a balance between freedom of expression and preserve the reputation of people, especially in the social media space, is the lengthy (and usually expensive) litigation the most effective path to achieve this result? If a tweet is considered to be defamatory, how are damages assessed?

for more info on the case: http://www.insureon.com/blog/post/2014/01/23/twitter-libel.aspx

Three annotated references

1. Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains (p. 276). New York: W.W. Norton.

The author crystallizes one of the most important debates of our time: as we enjoy the Net's bounties, are we sacrificing our ability to read and think deeply. He interweaves a fascinating account of recent discoveries in neuroscience by such pioneers as Michael Merzenich and Eric Kandel. Makes the case that every information technology carries an intellectual ethic, the Net in particular: that of an industrialist, an ethic of speed and efficiency of optimized production and consumption. this book reference will give me information on the recent discoveries in neuroscience to enlighten me on the influence technology can cave on the brain.

2. Keegan, S. (2012). Digital technologies are re-shaping our brains. Qualitative Market Research, 15(3), 328-346. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13522751211232012

This paper highlights the importance of retaining traditional thinking skills, while integrating the best and most useful aspects of "cyber-thinking". The paper explores the evidence, asks what it means for the research industry, society, and what, if anything, should we be doing about it. A combination of qualitative observations drawn from a wide range of client companies during many years of commercial qualitative practice and organizational change management. This paper is excellent because of the analysis of recent publications and face to face interviews with a vast variety of people.

3.Greengard, S. (2009). Are we losing our ability to think critically? Communications of the ACM, 52, 18-19.
The article discusses the impact computer technology may have on the ability of people to develop and maintain critical thinking skills. I can gain a deeper insight as to weather society benefits from social changes brought about by the internet and technology. and increase my assumption on how this is still a very new topic still in need of more direct answers. 

Targeting Millennials

In this Ad Budweiser embodies cult personality: Jay Z talks over a montage of  young folk doing what the generation "Millinnials" see as exhilarating: performing actions such as going to concerts, dancing, producing music, piggyback rides and what not. all of this is supposed to represent our national character somehow. As well as Euphoria with all these sub cultures getting hyped up for the "Made in America Festival" where all the trendsetters will be at.  

On T.V. the commercials that usually stick the most are the ones with pretty good tunes in the back round, the ones that get our phones out instantly to Shazam it. the wireless networks seem to be pros at this such as my personal carrier T-Mobile: first showing off Beautiful People by correlating famous and underground, older and modern artists to capture the full spectrum  of music listeners. T-Mobile uses Virtue Words like "Setting Music Free" and "Unleash".







For more information on T.V. Ads and getting information on whats trending this week, what companies spend most on advertisement or a variety of Ad genres check out http://www.ispot.tv/

Research topics

Is the Internet reprogramming our brain?
 We are not simply what we read or what messages we absorb but most of all how we read and decode the messages we absorb. one minute i can be reading an article that fulfills my expectations but this one link to the right of it also does so i click on that, I never went into full cognition with the first article and chances are ill never return to it. Both these link consisting of no more than 2,000 words and accompanied by advertisements. We are becoming human beings with vast amounts of Information but with lack of cognition with the numerous amounts of topics in our head and simply Going online to avoid reading in the traditional sense. I also wonder if the net is weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that was common in the earlier times after Gutenberg's invention of the printing press?

Will Books still be around after 50-100 years?
 our attention spans are shortening and  reading a dense book will become excessively boring and almost obsolete. we don't go to libraries any more to check out books and do hours of excessive research just to find a couple of quotes: we use the web and click on our mouse and pop there it is.
reading a book almost seems nostalgic such as buying and reading a newspaper when its already available on line with audio and the option of instant feedback, all displayed on our smart phones. or smoking a cigarette when i can can use a vape pen which is a modern cigarette with flavors, twice as much intake and to top it all off its cancer free(I read newspapers on occasion and i smoke cigarettes as well) . Although I would also like to know if there is higher retention rate when reading ink and paper then reading on a screen.