« December 2010 | Home | February 2011 »

Issue for January 2011

Is Wikileaks Relevant to Us?

Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2011 at 11:25 AM

The process of publishing may never have come under such intense scrutiny before.

By William Dunkerley

For most publishers, the dilemmas faced by Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange probably seem quite remote. Certainly Assange himself is a controversial figure. Opinions of him range from criminal to hero. But a number of publishing-related concepts have come up in coverage of the scandal that deserve analysis and clarification.

If some kind of counterpart situation had arisen in your field of publication, how do you think your editor would have handled it? Editors Only conducted an anecdotal survey posing the situation, "Let's say someone approached you with content that's sure to interest your readers. But it was leaked and a foreign government considers it to be confidential." The survey then asked the question, "What would be your editorial decision?"

Of the survey respondents, about half said they would publish the information. Around one-quarter said they wouldn't, and the remainder were uncertain.

Some respondents believe it would be their duty to publish, while others consider publication irresponsible. One publishing expert took a pragmatic view: "I'd bring in a lawyer or two to tell me what kind of consequences publication would have. If it is not going to be a criminal offense in my country, and if I have proof that papers are not faked, forged, or the like, I'd publish them. Definitely. Keeping a foreign country's state secrets is none of my business."

According to Columbia Journalism Review, twenty faculty members of the Columbia University graduate school of journalism wrote to President Obama and Attorney General Holder about Wikileaks. They warned that prosecuting Wikileaks would establish a dangerous precedent. Their view is that Wikileaks is engaging in a journalistic activity that is entitled to First Amendment protection.

At the same time, the Pentagon was asking news organizations not to publish the questionable information carried by Wikileaks. According to the Associated Press, Pentagon spokesman Dave Lappen warned against disseminating Wikileaks' "stolen" information, even if already published elsewhere.

CNN further editorialized on the matter. National political correspondent Jessica Yellin said, "We would draw a distinction between publishing information that comes to you by, [sic] and publishing information that is stolen by somebody." CNN national security contributor Frances Townsend disparagingly commented, "Is [Assange] profiting from the commission of a crime? And the answer to that is yes."

In December, I attended a World Affairs Council public discussion of the Wikileaks scandal held in Hartford, Connecticut. As you can imagine, there were comments both pro and con. But, what I found most interesting is that in the audience of around 30 people, there were two FBI agents who so identified themselves. They actively participated in the discussion. Among their comments were the suggestions that (a) one can't trust the Wikileaks information since the chain of custody is unclear, (b) China is somehow involved, and (c) decoupling the databases of the various US intelligence agencies could help avert future leaks. After the meeting, I asked a World Affairs Council official what the story was behind the attendance of the FBI agents, and was told that "they came because they were interested in the program."

Here are a few takeaway points from the Wikileaks scandal:

1. It is abundantly clear that when considering the publication of something as controversial as the leaked cables, it is worth doing a risk/benefit analysis. Would you really want to subject yourself to possible criminal prosecution (even if you believe it would be unfounded), and to a powerful government dispatching security agents into the field to speak out against you?

2. The claim by CNN's Jessica Yellin and the Pentagon's Dave Lapan that the Wikileaks information was stolen appears to be specious. For something to be stolen, there must be someone who has property rights to that which is stolen. Copyright law is the mechanism that establishes property rights for content such as the allegedly-stolen cables. However, according to my layman's understanding of US copyright law, the federal government is explicitly excluded from eligibility for copyright protection for its own work. That would mean that anything authored by an employee of the federal government is essentially "unowned," and thus unable to be stolen. The actions of the US Army intelligence analyst who was Wikileaks' source are another story, however. He has been charged with unauthorized disclosure of US classified information, which is not directly a publishing matter.

3. Similarly, CNN's Frances Townsend's comment about "profiting from the commission of a crime" seems off-base. Perhaps Townsend is thinking of the "Son of Sam" laws. They are intended to prevent a convicted criminal from profiting from his or her own crime. Why, if Townsend's apparent contention were true, the authors of books about the JFK assassination would be guilty, since they presumably profited from Oswald's commission of a crime!

4. A participant at the WAC discussion reasoned that if someone received a stolen television and then sold it, that person would be guilty of trafficking in stolen merchandise. He asked why wouldn't the same concept apply to Wikileaks. However, as pointed out above, the cables in question do not appear to be stolen property.

William Dunkerley is principal of William Dunkerley Publishing Consultants, www.publishinghelp.com.

Add your comment.

Posted in Content (RSS), News (RSS)

E-readers or Tablets?

Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2011 at 11:15 AM

What's the PDR (Portable Digital Reader) of choice? Is e-reading trending away from designated e-readers and toward tablets?

By Meredith L. Dias

If we learned anything from this year’s Consumer Electronics Show (CES), it’s that just a year can make a world of difference in e-reading trends. Just last year, e-readers were the talk of Las Vegas at CES 2010. The release of the Apple iPad, however, may have steered the portable digital reading device industry in a new direction -- toward tablets.

That’s not to say that PDRs like the Kindle and Nook are ailing. A recent International Data Corporation (IDC) report predicts that 14.7 million e-readers will sell this year (up from just under 11 million last year, or about 35 percent growth). This figure is impressive, but pales in comparison to the projected sales of 44.6 million tablet computers. And, at this year’s CES, tablets were generating an awful lot of buzz.

Seven tablet computer models were unveiled at CES 2011, including the long-anticipated RIM BlackBerry Playbook and Motorola Xoom. These new devices will broaden the tablet market, currently dominated by the Apple iPad, considerably. This onslaught of new tablets may spark a tablet computing revolution.

So which PDR devices will readers choose to fulfill their e-reading preferences as digital reading continues to boom? Designated e-readers like the Kindle or tablets like the iPad or Playbook? With so much uncertainty about where readers will ultimately flock, publishers ought to think twice before investing all their resources in a single device. The iPad was hailed as a potential savior for magazine and book publishers last year, but it is no longer the only tablet in town. Moreover, now that there is a color version of the Nook, perhaps it’s premature to predict imminent obsolescence for unitasking e-readers. There is more than one way to deliver magazine content, and considerable growth is projected in both e-reader and tablet markets.

We can do little more than speculate at this point. It seems all but certain that the tablet market will explode this year, but perhaps it is wiser to wait until the dust settles before choosing which device’s apps are best for your publication. I’m certainly not encouraging an imitate-not-innovate approach during these revolutionary times, but the shift in focus from e-readers to tablets in just a year should give publishers pause. What will happen at CES 2012? Will there be a new class of devices commanding the digital reading conversation at this time next year? Will e-readers make a comeback, or will tablets meet or even exceed expectations?

It’s exciting to think of what these tablets and e-readers (particularly the Nook Color) might make possible for magazines. Perhaps, at long last, the industry has found the solution to its digital/online profitability problem. But don’t leap before you look. 2011 may very well be the year of the tablet, but it remains to be seen which tablets will become formidable iPad competitors and what the pros and cons for publishers will be across the various app platforms. And don’t count out those designated e-readers just yet. Though their projected 2011 sales pale in comparison to tablets, an increase of 4 million devices in a year is nothing to sneeze at, either.

Meredith Dias is senior editor of STRAT and Editors Only.

Add your comment.

Posted in Technology (RSS)

« December 2010 | Top | February 2011 »