Blogs on trial (5x8 - 3/8/11)

Posted at 6:40 AM on March 8, 2011 by Bob Collins (16 Comments)
Filed under: Five by 8

The case of Johnny Northsider, ode to the skyways, a ride against depression, an incident in Iowa, and the king strikes a blow against museum stodginess.

1) THE TRIAL OF JOHNNY NORTHSIDE

It will be interesting to see how differently -- if at all -- the mainstream media and bloggers cover the civil case against John Hoff, better known as "Johnny Northside," whose blog post railing against the University of Minnesota's hiring of a community leader on his bad side may have cost Jerry Moore his job.

Even after all of these years, "traditional" journalists often can't resist the opportunity to brand an entire medium as a dirtier place than the rare air of a traditional newsroom, which requires us to ignore the many complaints against particulars in that setting.

"It's also fair to say that the the sort of give-and-take atmosphere of the blogosphere raised a greater tolerance for the kind of free-for-all commentary that we see so much on the Internet," U of M journalism expert Jane Kirtley told MPR's Laura Yuen. Find the code words there while remembering that the reason there is "freedom of the press" is because of Jay Near, who was described as "anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic, anti-black and anti-labor" when he began publishing The Saturday Press in Minneapolis in 1927 using dead trees as his weapon of choice. He claimed Jewish gangs were running Minneapolis and shortly after his first issue, he got himself shot to death.

Let's just say blogs didn't invent the "give-and-take" atmosphere of journalism, though like Jay Near, Hoff has plenty of enemies. Here's one.

Bloggers, meanwhile, may also see the case as another opportunity to exhaust us with the blogs vs. mainstream media debate of their own. Hoff, for example, makes a claim that his blog provides a valuable service, by pointing out the failings of the big boys. "When a house catches fire and burns down, we're right over there going, 'OK, they said the block, we want to know the specific address, we want to know who owned it. We want to know what's going to happen.' So we follow up," he said. "They get a big story, but they leave pieces laying around, and those pieces matter to my neighborhood."

There may be an element of truth to that, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the lawsuit at hand. From a journalism standpoint, it's about this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court said a Kansas preacher and his flock has every right to stand outside the funeral of soldiers killed in war and scream, "God hates fags." How, in turn, does a court say a guy with a blog -- or a sign, for that matter -- can't say the U of M shouldn't hire someone?

There may be a conversation to be had whether bloggers have the same "obligation" to exercise the same "care" that mainstream media exercises in the proper vetting of stories. That should be a very short conversation, however.

Moore's attorney says Hoff doesn't enjoy First Amendment speech protections because he doesn't get all sides of an issue. And, it's maintained, if others post inflammatory comments on his blog -- they do -- then he should be liable for those, too. That allegation should certainly get the attention of mainstream media, since the comments on their Web sites are (a) more numerous and (b) often at least as horrible as anything found on those newfangled blogs.

Suggested reading: The New Journalism? Why Traditional Defamation Laws Should Apply to Internet Blogs.

2) AN ODE TO SKYWAYS

It's an honest MPR employee who admits that the best part about the spiffy, still new, World Headquarters of News Cut is that it has a skyway connection. The skyway gives us a warm, safe way to get to all the often-closed second-floor businesses in downtown St. Paul.

We love our skyways in the Twin Cities. Or do we?

Videotect , the Architecture Minnesota magazine video competition, asked readers to create short videos on the skyway system and its impact on urban life. The website has posted the entries through March 18. Here's one:

James Tucker from Architecture Minnesota on Vimeo.

3) A RIDE AGAINST DEPRESSION

Mark Meier of Minneapolis is planning a coast-to-coast bike ride this summer to convince men to face depression head on.

"I continue to meet men suffering in silence," Meier tells the Strib's Gail Rosenblum, "After a presentation, they'll pull me aside or call or e-mail me and say, 'I think I might be depressed, but I can't tell anyone.'"

Meanwhile, Facebook is going to make it easier for people to report friends they think might be suicidal, the BBC says. This follows the death of a woman in the UK who posted she'd just taken an overdose of pills and nobody did anything. Why didn't people do anything? Perhaps they wanted to pick up the phone, but they didn't want to be wrong. The new system allows people to anonymously report suicidal content, which will then be relayed to authorities who will intervene.

4) AN INCIDENT IN IOWA?

Is Iowa showing its ugly side? Or does it just not like people who crash parties? Filmmaker Usama Alshaibi says he walked into a party in Fairfield, Iowa -- not far from Ottumwa -- said a woman on the street outside a loud party gave him the go ahead to walk in and join the celebration.

"Right when I walked in, somebody asked me my name. . .and I said, 'My name is Usama.' That's when they started hitting me," Alshaibi, 41, tells the Chicago Tribune.

A racially-motivated attack? Police say they've driven Alshaibi around the neighborhood and they've been unable to find the house where the assault allegedly occurred.

5) THE KING AND HIM

It's a sad commentary on the world of museums that just when you think one finally figured out a way to relate to its audience and have a little -- gasp -- fun, you find out that one didn't.

The best unauthorized Improv Everywhere missions are the ones that don't technically break any rules. Surely there is no policy on the books at the Met about dressing up like a painting and standing in front of it. The museum allows sketchbooks in for the benefit of art students, so we used one to conceal our sign and our photographs. The King brought a pencil in to sign his autographs as markers are not allowed.

Here's the whole -- hilariously unmuseum-like -- story

TODAY'S QUESTION

In Libya, Moammar Gadhafi is using aircraft against his own people. Voices in the U.S. Senate and elsewhere are calling for a no-fly zone over Libya to stop him. Should the United States use its military to intervene in Libya?

WHAT WE'RE DOING

Midmorning (9-11 a.m.) - First hour: Minnesota saw a 55-percent increase in sex trafficking in 2010, and people fighting the problem say Minnesota's legal system penalizes the very victims it's seeking to protect. A bill currently in Minnesota's Legislature seeks to correct that.

Second hour: There's still three feet of snow on the ground, but baseball season isn't far off. Midmorning gets the latest from spring training, and speaks with the author of a book on local baseball legend Toni Stone.

Midday (11 a.m. - 1 p.m.) - First hour: Former legislative leaders Steve Sviggum and Roger Moe discuss their plan for a nonpartisan commission to handle redistricting and talk about why so many issues become heavily political.

Second hour: A new America Abroad documentary about Muslim charities, called "Alms in the Name of Allah."

Talk of the Nation (1-3 p.m.) - First hour: Should the U.S. continue with its timetable to withdraw from Iraq?

Second hour: Pollster Frank Luntz on his book, "Win."

---

Comments (16)

The Hoff trial is not about the first amendment. The Hoff trial is a defamation trial. Defamation is a tort. The elements of the tort allow for first amendment freedom of expression, while holding people accountable for unprotected damaging false speech.

The constitutional issues of defamation have been fairly well mapped out by now, and the case is going to be decided based on whether the elements of the Plaintiff's tort case are proven, and not by reference to the constitution. Nor does it matter that the vehicle of the alleged defamation was a blog rather than a dead tree publication or by standing on a street corner.

It seems that this case seems to be "about" all sorts of things it's not really about, depending largely on the perspective of the observer/analyst.

Posted by Chris | March 8, 2011 7:28 AM

---

Right. I get that. I'm addressing the particular claims on both sides. A defamation case really has nothing to do with a medium, and Mr. Moore is asserting a blogger with a viewpoint doesn't enjoy First Amendment protections.

That may be outside the scope of a defamation case, but that's where he framed it.

Likewise, Professor Kirtley is addressing the tolerance of a medium based on its character, and I'm also addressing that.

The amount of irrelevance in the *discussion* about the case -- which is a different beast than its merits -- is fairly hefty and what I'm addressing.

Posted by Bob Collins | March 8, 2011 7:42 AM

---

All you have to do is Google these three words to find out the Truth about Johnny Northside and his band of malicious misfits:

John Hoff Fraud

Google it to find the details on these cracktvist transplants that have recently moved here from out of of the area.

Posted by Jordan Hawkman | March 8, 2011 7:45 AM

---

I see where you're coming from. The attorneys are entitled to their share of the blame for framing this as a first amendment vs. the blogs case. It might have something to do with the attention-seeking propensities of the players involved.

Posted by Chris | March 8, 2011 7:56 AM

---

@chris I hear "attention-seeking propensities " and I think, these lawyers aren't getting paid much for this case. This is just advertising for their next case.

Posted by BJ | March 8, 2011 9:48 AM

---

"Moore's attorney says Hoff doesn't enjoy First Amendment speech protections because he doesn't get all sides of an issue."

Sports writers are hosed if this is the case. 99% of sports reporting is only from one side. Very dangerous territory.

@Chris - This is most certainly a 1st Amendment issue. The church idiots with the signs just won their civil case because the Supreme Court said they have the right to their opinion under the 1st amendment. Just because it is tort does not remove the 1st amendment issue. It is there to protect our right to an opinion against each other as much as it is there to protect our opinion against the government.

Posted by BReynolds | March 8, 2011 10:31 AM

---

@BReynolds The elements of the tort and its defenses are designed to consider the first amendment implications. The first amendment is already baked in, by exempting truthful statements and (generally) pure opinions.

I'm not sitting on on the trial, but in this case Hoff appears to be taking the position that at least some of the statements at issue were true assertions of fact--which is inconsistent with them being mere opinions.

Maybe someone should file a defamation suit against the Westboro Church on God's behalf. See if they're able to prove to a jury what they say about God is true.

Posted by Chris | March 8, 2011 12:16 PM

---

Jordan Hawkman, could you confirm (or deny) the assertion that you're actually Paul Koenig, as reported by The Deets?

Posted by Bob Collins | March 8, 2011 12:34 PM

---

#5 - I suspect there is someone in the development (aka fund raising) department at the Met who wishes that a meeting had been called over the prank. It might have gotten "sanctioned" pretty fast. (Or at least there might have been an invitation to come back for an "official" event.)

Posted by JackU | March 8, 2011 12:54 PM

---

That Jordan Hawkman entity is advertising on his website:

"Minnesota Public Radio just linked our site within their even keeled balanced professionally written journalistic article just moments ago... Thank you to our friends at MPR for the link within their article."

Posted by Jamie | March 8, 2011 2:17 PM

---

Jamie, I saw that, too, and was puzzled to find that it didn't link back to the MPR call-out it cited. Did it work differently for you?

The quality and tone of the site don't seem to recommend it as a source for other news organizations.

Posted by Heather | March 8, 2011 2:24 PM

---

Indeed.

Posted by Jamie | March 8, 2011 5:35 PM

---

Mr Collins,

The answer to your question is best found at this link. He stated he was not at the trial to JHG. It appears that Ed Kohler was incorrectly reporting (whether it was knowingly or unknowingly) that he was at the trial.

Here is the link reporting on our contact with him:

http://jordanhawkman.blogspot.com/2011/03/cracktavists-up-to-necks-inwellyou-get.html

Posted by Jordan Hawkman | March 8, 2011 8:25 PM

---

Interesting response from Jordan Hawkman. That's the strangest denial I've ever read, flipping between 3rd and 1st person as he meanders along.

It's worth noting that another member of the galley at the first day of the trial commented on my blog that she had a weird encounter with the man pictured on my site, Paul Koenig. Personally, I'm putting more trust in non-anonymous sources in this case.

Posted by Ed Kohler | March 9, 2011 11:35 AM

---

One other thing: When I previously put together a post walking through the theory that Don Allen was the primary contributor to the Jordan Hawkman site, I was contacted by people in a position to know to let me know that Mr. Allen is not the primary publisher. Since suggesting that Paul Koenig was the primary person behind the site, they've gone silent. Coincidental, perhaps.

Also, the person commenting here seems to be being very careful to not blatantly lie. "It appears that Ed Kohler was incorrectly reporting" based on a report on an anonymous blog that is contradicted by people posting under their own names.

I'm willing to be this: Paul Koenig will not be at the trial today.

Posted by Ed Kohler | March 9, 2011 11:42 AM

---

Jordan Hawkman's REAL name....... Michelle Koenig..

Posted by Jennie | March 14, 2011 5:26 PM

---

Post a comment

The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments:
+ Bold: <b>Text</b>
+ Italic: <i>Text</i>
+ Link: <a href="http://url" target="_blank">Link</a>
Fields marked with * are required.

Name*:

E-mail Address*:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments*:

Comment Preview appears above this form upon pressing the "preview" button. Edit your comment and press "preview" again, until you are satisfied with your comment.

Your comment may not appear on the blog until several minutes after it was submitted.

• E-mail this page
• Print this page
• Tweet this page
• Share this

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories