Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#2I resisted submitting this story because of its baiting headline, although I won't be surprised if it gets a lot of attention.
Setting aside the fact that the headline is demonstrably false (Wikipedia is certainly a 'big site'), it is curious to me how the language of the headline actually validates the 'internet blackout' even as it appears to disparage it. I don't believe that you typically see reports in major newswires when a petition 'fails' to succeed, as Reuters appears to be defining it here, and yet here we are.
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#3So Wikipedia and Reddit aren't big?
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#4> "This publicity stunt does a disservice to its users by promoting fear instead of facts," said Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and a sponsor of SOPA. "Perhaps during the blackout, Internet users can look elsewhere for an accurate definition of online piracy."
I'm sure the MPAA's Web site will be online!
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#5Reuters classifies Wikipedia as "the online dictionary Wikipedia"?
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#6Blacking out your own site to protest a law is as silly as cutting off your ear to woo a lover. I like Google's approach.
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#7This "stunt" has been solely designed to raise awareness and mobilize support. It doesn't take Google or Facebook blacking out their site to accomplish this - simply running a text link or a banner on their sites would go a long way towards helping a huge audience understand the heinous demands of the IP Lobby. By that same stroke, the more dramatic blackouts will also raise a lot of awareness. Despite the differing tactics, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people will be exposed to these important issues tomorrow.
I call that a success.
Reuters story was just another example of the thinly researched, hastily prepared and barely coherent writing that passes as journalism nowadays.
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#8How much did the MPAA pay for this article?
No, seriously. Re-read the first 3 paragraphs. That is 100% paid for press.
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#9Reuters classifies Wikipedia as "the online dictionary Wikipedia"?
Yep. Wiktionary is the online encyclopedia.
Re: Internet blackout against U.S. law fails to enlist big sites
#10This "stunt" has been solely designed to raise awareness and mobilize support. It doesn't take Google or Facebook blacking out their site to accomplish this - simply running a text link or a banner on their sites would go a long way towards helping a huge audience understand the heinous demands of the IP Lobby. By that same stroke, the more dramatic blackouts will also raise a lot of awareness. Despite the differing…
Reuters is part of the establishment, and is acting the part, so no surprise there.
The truth is that opposition to this bill is multi-layered: the masses of Wikipedia and Reddit walk the networked streets shouting with their megaphones, while Google and Facebook quietly cut checks to people in suit who know how to talk to congressmen.
This is why Big Media actors, like Murdoch and Reuters, are so angry about it all: they thought they only had to deal with Occupy-style "crazies", and instead they find themselves challenged on their own ground as well. They are trying very hard to frame the protest as a "failure" even though it's being wildly successful. I wonder what will happen if/once PIPA is voted down.