Lisa Borodkin

From “Covfefe Talk” to Covid 19 January 18, 2021

Posted by lborodkin in : Ethics , add a comment

It seems almost quaint to think in terms of the self-regulating nature of the attorney profession in light of the January 6, 2021 armed insurrection on the US Capitol, and the need to de-platform the President of the United States from the major social media products, Twitter and Facebook. However, these events exposed major fault lines in the way the general public view the operation of the First Amendment. Many claimed the right to be heard on private commercial web-based social media products. In such times, who would the public trust to explain the boundaries of such legal rights? Attorneys — one would hope.

In March 2019, I presented a Continuing Legal Education panel at the SxSW festival with Hanna Shafran on social media ethics for lawyers. Entitled “Covfefe Talk: Social Media Ethics Rules for 2019,” (audio replay can be found here), Hanna and I ran through a number of ethics scenarios presented by attorneys’ use of various forms of social media. In 2019, how attorneys should deal with online disinformation (TLDR for attorneys: don’t) seemed more like esoteric trivia rather than a potentially life-threatening epidemic.

Yet it has been repeatedly reported, with increasing levels of alarm, that the spread of online disinformation represents a chronic threat to the health and safety of the general public. For most of 2020, I was concerned about the spread of dangerous anti-scientific conspiracy theories with regard to Covid-19. But in early 2021, an even more shocking rupture in occurred. The failure of the three branches of the US government to operate as a check and balance on the spread of disinformation, in turn fueled the Capitol riots. The fact that Facebook and Twitter were able to do what Congress and the US Courts could not (stop the President of the United States from spouting dangerous conspiracy theories in real time) should cause every attorney in America to ask, “How did we get here?” and “How can we guard against the inevitable repetition of such events?”

The legal profession, in fact, has a number of ethics rules and procedures in place to monitor and discipline such lapses as would cause society to lose faith in the legal profession, as Hanna and I discussed at SxSw. It is the duty of the members of our profession to know and use these ethics rules in these times. The recent proceeding to disbar Rudy Guiliani will be watched closely. However, it is only a start. To paraphrase Edmund Burke, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing. We should start by knowing the ethics rules, applying them scrupulously, and calling in appropriate circumstances for the application of those rules to deter abuse of the public trust.

An alarming number of highly-placed members of our government with extremely sophisticated and prestigious legal training nonetheless participated in an ideological assault on our very form of democracy by objecting to the election results. They know better. As lawyers, we cannot just look the other way. It is essential to the survival of our profession that we, as lawyers, call out their wrongdoing and live these principles ourselves. Otherwise, why should the public trust us?

#What the HashTag? Legal TweetChat for Web Journalists March 26, 2010

Posted by lborodkin in : Uncategorized , add a comment

Cory Doctorow predicted that printed newspapers will become like opera, the province of “rich weirdos.” Despite this, journalism is alive and well in the new media era, and living in Cyberspace.

To help such online journalists, I participated in a Legal Issues Panel on Episode 7 of WJChat through TweetChat with some of the legal leaders in new media journalism. The panel was assembled by Robert Hernandez (@webjournalist), who teaches a course in Online Journalism at USC’s Annenberg School.

My fellow panelists were Kurt Opsahl of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (@EFF), David Ardia and Kimberly Isbell of Harvard’s Citizen Media Law Project (@CitMediaLaw) at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society, and Jack Lerner (@JackLerner) of USC’s Intellectual Property and Technology Law Clinic.

Here is the transcript of WJChat Episode 7. A more coherent digest of the panel discussion is here.

If the formatting looks wonky, that’s because it is. My Columbia Law Review editors would have had a minor heart attack back in the day where we debated such fine points as whether to end possessive plurals with an ” s’ ” or an ” s’s. ” (For grammar geeks, it was decided that official Columbia Law Review style that year was to use the full ” s’s ” because the then-Editor-in-Chief thought the ” s’s ” conveyed plural better than a “lonely single apostrophe hanging out by itself.”)

As a matter of pure Blue Book style, I agree. But I don’t get a credit for my Note on the Columbia Law Review website, since I signed my copyright away. You can read it if you can afford a Westlaw or Lexis subscription.

Perhaps one day we’ll follow @BlueBook on Twitter. Properly, it would be @AUniformSystemofCitation, but that’s over the character length. In today’s Twitterverse, we wouldn’t use an extra character on subtleties such as an extra “s” or whether two spaces follow a period. Life is short, right? Maybe it’s not pretty, but we’d claim attribution for what we write.

That’s a fair trade-off, I think.

But back to the show.

The panel discussed ethical, legal and practical problems of online news gathering and reporting. We focused on issues unique to web journalism – shield laws, web commenting, quotations, expectations of privacy, Creative Commons licenses, retractions, and DMCA agents. At times, there was a division between normative law and empirical law — that is, the split in what we believe doctrines such as the Fair Use defense in copyright may or should allow, and practical rules of thumb easy enough for your average Joe or Jill citizen journalist to stay out of trouble.

Here are some useful resources for online journalists that came out of the discussion:

EFF’s Legal Guide for Bloggers
The Online Media Legal Network
PACER.gov and RecaptheLaw for federal cases
(To this, I add FindaCase.com.)
flickr.com for Creative Commons-licensed photos
archive.org for web history
http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/agent.pdf to register a DMCA agent
EFF’s guide to Section 230 Protection
EFF’s Bloggers as Journalists