« Justice Is Blind: Matters of Taste | Main | UTR News and Views: One First Street Edition »

October 23, 2004


Article III Groupie

In my view, the main difference is one of context. When placed in a more complete context, Judge Posner's remarks sound much less harsh (at least to me). But I wasn't present for the talk, so I won't opine further.

The issue of quotation verification--which is a standard practice within "real journalism," but much less common in the blogosphere--raises interesting questions about Journalism versus Blogging. As bloggers become more widely read and influential, should their journalistic responsibilities increase?


Harvard students are making a regular practice out of misquoting the judicial branch, aren't they? Between this and the Scalia fiasco, would someone put some checks and balances on that student body?


Interesting that Judge Posner wishes that bloggers had checked with him before publishing. I'm pretty reluctant to email judges about anything. I suppose if it's something about a public speech, that's different than emailing them about a recent opinion or some other topic.


As WT noted, "my paper meanders a bit, but I will say that it's not plagiarized" is his paraphrase. And as such, it does not compare too unfavorably to: ""My paper meanders, but at least I wrote it myself. And while naturally I have not acknowledged my predecessors generously, neither have I made a wholesale appropriation of someone else's ideas."

The essential message of sticking a finger in the collective eye of the HLS faculty seems to be largely the same.

The comments to this entry are closed.