Taking Advantage of Social Networking for Good and Bad
A recent event involving copyright infringement elicited a flurry of social networking activity, illustrating the power of the online community to promptly deliver a tenacious response to any transgressor. Even though it was the openness of the web that gave rise to the problem in the first place, that same transparency then allowed for immediate feedback that sought to right a wrong.
The issue at hand: A contributor to a CBS-run website, Smart Planet, wrote a blog about healthcare. To illustrate his essay, author Dana Blankenhorn pulled an image called Big Mother, which was originally produced by artist Chris Buzelli for Boston Magazine. Buzelli was outraged that somebody else would repurpose an original piece of art without offering compensation or asking permission.
Buzelli commented on Blankenhorn’s article, asking him to remove the image. Blankenhorn did so, but not without chastising the artist: “This idea that one must gain permission before doing what comes naturally on the Web has to end. You have the tools to stop it. Use them.”
That did not sit well with Buzelli. He put out a call to his fellow artists, and they quickly hijacked the comments’ section of the offending author’s blog post. Dozens of comments poured in, turning what was intended to be a conversation about the new healthcare reform into a heated discussion about copyright laws and artists’ rights. The comments showed no mercy. “Your views on copyright are appalling,” one contributor wrote. “You are a thief,” another said.
The Internet has blurred the line of who owns what, leading many artists to fear their work will be disseminated illegitimately without credit or compensation. Blankenhorn is not alone in his view that it’s the artist’s responsibility to make sure his work doesn’t get stolen, and that web users have free rein to redistribute anything they find online.
But the openness of the Internet, while threatening in a way, has also ushered in a new level of transparency and accountability to those who make poor decisions. In this case, the “offender” was forced to answer to the community at large – in a public online forum.
When something like this occurs, word spreads quickly and self-policing begins. If the action doesn’t get corrected, the offending party will at least find himself unable to hide from the ridicule he incurs. If you commit a mistake, everybody sees it and lets you know. To their credit, the author and CBS haven’t removed the huge number of mostly negative comments posted. The amount of feedback on Blankenhorn’s blog is large and visible. He attempted to respond with another article that specifically addressed the issue of copyrighted images online, but that only produced more outrage, and the increasingly angry readers following the story again blitzed the comments’ section with negative feedback.
This visible, publicly accessible record of the conversation unfolding is unique to this world of social networking. By making the decision to use somebody’s original artwork without permission or compensation, Blankenhorn taught the online world a lesson: If you take advantage of the freedom of the Internet, it just might turn around and take advantage of you.
Illustration: Jake Sproul (Please don’t steal it)
