Allegations And Implications: Damaging To The Deaf Community
If someone makes an accusation or a negative implication regarding specific individuals without any proof, this person is also hurting the Deaf Community.
.
If someone makes an accusation or a negative implication regarding specific individuals without any proof, this person is also hurting the Deaf Community.
.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:48 am
Is this the article in its entirety? Just the one, lone sentence? If yes, I guess something specific must have happened…
November 15th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Oh brother.
One negative aspect about cyberspace is that people tend to assume a lot, leading to wrong judgments. I see that when we voice our opinions, we get seen as slanderers, etc.
As I have said several times, when one’s perception does not match other’s perception, disagreements would follow and sometimes with the emotional aspect, depending on the subject.
Keep up blogging, Mishka. You make a lot of valid points, worth listening to.
November 15th, 2008 at 8:31 am
MZ –
I completely understand what you are saying. This is very small deaf community. It’s like everybody in this blogosphere know this person.
Censoring in the leadership style is something that the leader needs to be careful. And this person needs to clean up his act in order to protect his reputation and the community. Must not the finger-pointing at someone or somebody that he knows.
Unfortunately, I read his comment in your blog and he made a comment in his own blog in the deafread is not appropriate. That is sad example.
We need to respect people’s views on diversity such as oral, Total Communication, cue speech, cochlear implants and many more. We need to learn to accept others.
Good thinking, MZ. I thought this blog you made is very educational.
November 15th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Yes, DT…it’s John Egbert making an accusation to the former DBC members on his latest blog:
http://blog.deafread.com/egbertpress/2008/11/14/my-comment-for-schizophrenic-psychopathic-where-does-it-end/
November 15th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Yeah, something specific did happen – a comment was removed in the previous entry, then the commenter re-posted it on DeafRead for all to see.
It’s just a confirmation to me that it will require a libel lawsuit to cease this kind of behavior. Extremely unfortunate.
November 15th, 2008 at 11:44 am
MZ
I hope this is okay with you that I copied the information about how to protect yourself from defamation. Here it is below.
However, some states laws are different.
What Defenses Are Available To People Accused of Defamation?
The most important defense to an action for defamation is “truth”, which is an absolute defense to an action for defamation.
Another defense to defamation actions is “privilege”. For example, statements made by witnesses in court, arguments made in court by lawyers, statements by legislators on the floor of the legislature, or by judges while sitting on the bench, are ordinarily privileged, and cannot support a cause of action for defamation, no matter how false or outrageous.
A defense recognized in most jurisdictions is “opinion”. If the person makes a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation. Whether a statement is viewed as an expression of fact or opinion can depend upon context – that is, whether or not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as being in a position to know whether or not it is true. If your employer calls you a pathological liar, it is far less likely to be regarded as opinion than if such a statement is made by somebody you just met. Some jurisdictions have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and instead hold that any statement that suggests a factual basis can support a cause of action for defamation.
A defense similar to opinion is “fair comment on a matter of public interest”. If the mayor of a town is involved in a corruption scandal, expressing the opinion that you believe the allegations are true is not likely to support a cause of action for defamation.
A defendant may also attempt to illustrate that the plaintiff had a poor reputation in the community, in order to diminish any claim for damages resulting from the defamatory statements.
A defendant who transmitted a message without awareness of its content may raise the defense of “innocent dissemination”. For example, the post office is not liable for delivering a letter which has defamatory content, as it is not aware of the contents of the letter.
An uncommon defense is that the plaintiff consented to the dissemination of the statement.
Deb here
MZ and readers, if you have some additional information to share with readers in blogshere and vlog world on how to protect yourself is to educate each other because this is public posting for everyone to see and read on this internet. There are some people who may not be aware of laws that could get them into trouble legally is to educate them.
D
November 15th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Wow, what implications people make of simple comments or actions such as omitting a response from a blog. Blogging and responding aren’t as simple as one might think.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
I view this blogger’s re-posting in his own blog of a comment he left on MZ’s previous blog with much skepticism.
The blogger has not provided any proof with his allegations and he has avoided naming names.
That’s not exactly libel, but the accusatory tone was certainly directed at ex-DBC core members, as anybody in the deaf blogosphere can guess. That’s the troubling part, this guessing turns into finger-pointing from just “hearsay”. There is nothing to back up these allegations, so far as any of us know.
This same blogger called for DR’s censorship of another blogger last year and used personal attacks and erroneous information to smear this person. And THAT can be backed up with proof right here on DR.
November 15th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Karen: Keep up blogging, Mishka. You make a lot of valid points, worth listening to.
I second Karen. I agree that you make a good point. I hope they’ll realize that Deaf community needs everyone to be positive and educate each other in a good way.
November 15th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Same ole…
I think that people need to move on.
One thing for sure, we all do see the same thing when it comes to ASL and deaf children. We may have different views on how to go about doing it (reaching out, etc.) And this going back to last summer is not getting anyone anywhere…stagnant.
Anyway, off the point, a bit, if I may. I watched this video over at CI Blog…Is Bilateral Really Better? What struck me was the video was really heart warming. I wonder if there is a video of deaf children signing ASL, expressing to their hearts content why they prefer ASL. This way, we can have videos showing both approach for the parents to see. Right now, there isn’t much on deaf kids and ASL. Deafread kids blog do show some, but, I think we need more. So, how about it, folks?
November 15th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Proof means one has to provide names, names of organizations, the event’s name, etc –in other words, the when, where, who, and how of an allegation.
To go around shooting off at the mouth a negative implication or allegation based on “hearsay” has the snowball effect of people guessing, then pointing fingers. Innocent people get smeared for no good reason. When I read about an allegation and there is nothing to back it up, then indeed I wonder about the accuser’s motive for doing so.
To provide proof along with the allegation is a serious action as such a deed has serious repercussions in a small community. But to make an allegation without any proof is spurious, like more hearsay to feed the gossip mills, and readers should be wary of such trash talk. Likewise an allegation based on erroneous information that was not double-checked for accuracy of facts but used to smear a person anyway.
The blogger who re-posted his comment to your previous blog article in his own blog tried to have another blogger censored from DR last year and attempted to smear this person with personal attacks and erroneous information he didn’t bother to check for accuracy. There’s plenty of proof regarding this blogger’s actions on DR.
Hence, my skepticism.
November 15th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I’m sorry, I’m still lost and if it is just as well that I stay lost, then so be it. Otherwise, DeafPundit, thanks.
November 15th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Wow, okay…you were defending Aidan but now you’re getting this crap?!? WTF with that?!? You don’t deserve that! He sure wastes his time and energy to chase you and others all the way to the end of earth and whatnot. If he wants to focus on his “mission”, he needs to lay off those pipe and work on his “mission”, not on you and others as well.
Misha
November 16th, 2008 at 12:27 am
MZ defending a strong fan of this organization had her attacked by the same organization?
This is so fucked up
November 16th, 2008 at 12:54 am
By not suing for damages, one can permit the defamation grow into something 100 X more damaging to the deaf community.
November 16th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I agree with Misha’s comment about how this particular blogger is wasting his time and energy
criticizing others and not focusing on his “mission”. Rather than dwell on perceived hurts, he should move on.
Couldn’t help but note with an irony that his next blog article is titled as none other than “Please Focus on Deaf Babies and Children in Schools”. The blogger himself should take heed of his own words.
November 17th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
How is a DBC leader telling everybody that a blogger ‘lied’ productive to the Deaf Community? Especially when the person has no proof? Does this person actually expect people to work together if this person claims they are lying?
How would the DBC ‘leader’ know what I know and don’t know? Is he a fortune teller? I won’t recommend the person to work as a fortune teller as he wouldn’t make a good business.
I find it very revealing that this DBC ‘leader’ ignored Jill’s rally. I thought the deaf babies and children are very important?
I also find it interesting that this DBC ‘Leader’ didn’t support those who were maliciously labeled,including one who is a strong DBC supporter, but lashed out at someone who is trying to encourage a healthy Deaf Community by explaining how negative labels hurt the morale of the community. The empowerment of Deaf Community isn’t important?
Unlike this person, I keep both the little and big picture in mind.
November 17th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
So you have no problem with a leader lying? If so, interesting….
Please give me concrete examples where I mistreated a number of bloggers, including the links to their blogs. Thank you.
November 17th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Are you saying he lied?
November 18th, 2008 at 1:02 am
He kept saying this: “These irresponsible detractors DO actually know more than they are letting on in regard to the infamous issue of the letters and videophone calls made to the schools in Rochester and Fremont last summer, but these same people continue to act as if they are innocent of any wrongdoing by resorting to the ruse of demanding proof of documentation of their misdeeds.”
What do you call it when he made these claims, when in reality I have no idea who made these contacts with these schools. I call it libel.
November 18th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
This is an excellent lesson for people to keep in mind: Hearsay by Aidan Mack.
http://www.deafvideo.tv/video/watch/29684/
Don’t blindly believe what people say. Get verification straight from the person.
January 24th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
I rest my case. You cannot find where I ‘mistreated’ a number of bloggers.
Because there are none.