Posting someone's personal information is morally and ethically wrong

Some say such tactics are reprehensible and must be rejected in a culture that values civility. They would believe it is time for people who consider themselves fans of Michelle Malkin to publically reject her and to take a personal stand against her. In front of everyone. Either you're agin it or you're for it.

From the Santa Cruz Sentinel:

After nationally syndicated columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin posted the e-mail addresses and phone numbers of three members of Students Against War, they received a flood of obscene and harassing messages from around the country, including death threats. When a liberal Web site, in retaliation, published Malkin's cell phone number and home address, a full-blown blog war ensued.



Cyber War Heats Up

---

Updated On: 9/10/06 at 01:41 PM

I'd hate to paint with an overly broad brush, which is something Michelle Malkin does as a matter of course, but I can't help but wonder if all of her supporters and fans think that what she did is a good thing?

---

Yes, I too am very very curious as to this very issue.

---

I am happy to engage this debate, as soon as I have the full story. Does anyone else have more "facts." Clearly, any critical thinker can see that the highly edited snippet presented here is not the full story.

The highly regulated and enforced literary standards of this posting board require full disclosure before rendering an opinion.

PS: I have disagreed with Michelle before. I am anxious to have the full story aired.

Have any of you ever disagreed with the NY Times editorial board?

Just thinking about intellectual robotics.

Oh. I hadn't even thought of that. That there might be Michelle Malkin fans on this very board. Now I'm curious. What must they think of what some would call this ethical lapse of hers?

Edited to ad that I happily supplied a link to the article I quoted from the very beginning. From there it should just be a jump and a google and a click to read even more about the very subject.

Mr. Chanticleer, in case you were unaware, the highlighted red sentence is what is called a "link" and by simply clicking it, it will take you to the article I very clearly credited and excerpted from.

I for one await your response to this very critical ethical issue. Please remember, that this is a discussion about the ethics and morals of one public person, and not about disagreeing with the editorial stance of a newspaper that is no part of this discussion. I know how hard it is for you to contain yourself to the topic at hand without flailing and tossing in new topics that have nothing to do with the original discussion.

---

Updated On: 9/10/06 at 02:50 PM

Da.

Oh thank you, Namo, I saw the link. I just simply wasn't relying on one biased source to form an entire opinion. Usually, I try to look beyond one overtly warped, discredited source before I speak on something.

I really don't know how you might form opinions, but knowing the "newly enforced standards" on this journalistic MECCA, I knew that I needed to look beyond the newspaper of record to find the truth. I suggest that you do the same so that we aren't deleted again...

Off to research...I shall return. In the meantime, everyone keep looking frantically through the TIMES for more dirt on conservatives. There's a lot there, but you know, on this board, the TIMES is holy. I'll have to stop by and worship at the shrine while I am googling away (all at my good friend Namo's suggestion).

Thanks again buddy.

Well I will say this for Michelle Malkin, I hadn't thought of the line of argument she uses in defense of her actions of publishing the personal information of people, (Mr. Chanticleer, this is also from the same Santa Cruz Sentinel article I clearly quoted above and which is reachable from the helpful red text link "Cyber War Heats Up" that I provided from the very beginning):

When students called Malkin to request she remove the student information, Malkin reposted the names and numbers several more times. She defended the decision, blaming SAW for posting a link to the news release on its Web site.

I hadn't thought of this. Did the SAW students lose their right to complain about Michelle Malkin publishing their personal information because they posted a link to the press release which included their contact information on their website?

I'm starting to think that maybe she has a legal point, even if the students felt it was morally and ethically wrong.

I wonder what others here think?

---

God, do I ever miss the meltdown thread.

---

Well, this is certainly worth looking at a little more.

I did not realize at all that Michelle's highly rated and well researched blog had a posting board that could be compared to the one here at our beloved BWW. We should all be spending time over there with our "friendly debates" as a part of our BWW "diversity" training.

If she does not have a posting board (and I wouldn't know, Namo-you are the expert on Michelle), it seems that drawing parallels was a weak, if not non-existant strategy from the beginning.

But, of course, if you don't function in an accountable, professional environment every day, you would not have to worry about credibility and things like making an argument parallel, and all that academic stuff-you know, truth, integrity, anti-harassment policies-other things in civil, professional society. You could just ignore reality, and make arguments that were not logical. You could "cherry-pick" your facts and play to the "home team."

Also, when there are others watching, and you can entertain the home crowd with your grand-standing and weak, almost non-existant thought-processes, the home team will cheer you on. In fact, they will gang up on anyone from the "other team."

Now, I realize that no one on this board would do anything like make a bogus argument, reveal half of the facts, or slant a story to fit one's purposes. This board has stunning integrity, and flawless journalistic standards. Only facts here. And, don't try to flaunt the rules, because the moderators insure a "fair and balanced" view every time.

There were certainly a lot of words in that post, Mr. Chanticleer, but I don't see any that actually address the fact that Michelle Malkin posted people's personal information on the web more than once and defended herself by saying that she found the information on said people's website.

I personally think it's a very interesting line of argument she used, and while I appreciate the time you must have taken to type out what reads like the equivalent of a drowning man splashing violently in the water as if he believes the more water he displaces will somehow save him from finally going under, it didn't address that issue at all.

---

Abuse! Abuse! Calling out Craig...

Chanti, be a dear and don't just cry "abuse" but do explain what kind of abuse you see and where you see it...