Who are the "Media Bloggers Association" and what gives them to right to negotiate copyright with the Associated Press? -- UPDATED

The Associated Press has promised to meet with some organization I've never heard of called "The Media Bloggers Association" to work out the details of its frankly insane proposal to sell licenses to quote five or more words from AP stories.

Who are the Media Bloggers Association? Turns out it's mostly one guy, some right-wing attack-blogger who hangs around on the lecture circuit and ran a blog devoted to pissing on Keith Olbermann. Our Teresa Nielsen Hayden's blogged an extensive analysis of the Media Bloggers Association and its total irrelevance to blogging and its total unsuitability to representing "blogging" in some kind of negotiation with the AP.

The Media Bloggers Association substantially consists of one lackluster blogger named Robert Cox. His weblog, Words in Edgewise, and the MBA website, are two halves of the same site. Robert Cox isn’t all that interested in blogging per se. What he’s really into is self-aggrandizement by representing himself as someone who speaks for bloggers and blogging. An embarrassing number of organizations have fallen for this.

Link

Update: Regarding today's post on the Media Bloggers Association, whom the AP and New York Times said would "represent bloggers" in negotiations over whether the AP would be able to charge $12.50 for quoting five words from a news story (and only if you promised not to criticize the AP!), Mary sez, "AP (and the NYTimes) misrepresented that the MBA is representing bloggers to negotiate a policy about use of AP story quotes. I don't know Robert Cox, and wasn't familiar with the MBA, but some of the founding members include Jeff Jarvis, Jay Rosen, O Willis, Rebecca MacKinnon and Micah Sifry. Jay, Liza and others are saying that when the MBA represents bloggers in trouble with the FBI, over C&Ds and with other issues, they've been helpful."

The NYT (in implying) and AP in it's headline and throughout the article outright, completely misunderstand this, and lead readers to misunderstand that there is even an institution that can "negotiate for the blogosphere." The blogophere is made up of millions of little spheres of conversation and influence, and those are made up of tens of millions of bloggers. It's utterly ridiculous and shows a complete lack of understanding of the blogosphere to believe there is some sort of institution on the other side of traditional media. The whole point of blogging is that people do what they want, that online publishing is completely atomized, and that if some sort of policy were to be negotiated with one small group, no one else would likely follow it *because Fair Use exists* and I would personally rather follow the constitution on this one.

I think it's time for a correction/restatement/clarification at NYT and a complete retraction at AP.

Link (Thanks, Mary!)

• [whysteriastar]

  This is some bull. I know over at Daily Blog Tips they actually just started trying to get people together into a bloggers group to deal with issues facing bloggers. I guess right now is a perfect time to do it.
  My hat’s off to Kos for daring to stand up to the bullies.

• [takeshi]

  @ maryhodder:

  These last two comments of yours weren’t posted while I was typing, so forgive me if I came across as rash in my thinking. If it’s true that the NYT misreported, then I do feel sorry for the guy. Still, he’s not much of a blogger, and he obviously enjoys being considered relevant. And at times for events that he had nothing to do with.

• [Anonymity is Important]

  Check out the serious stalking MBA founder Robert Cox did on one of his critics.

  http://watchingolbermannwatch.blogspot.com/2007/03/bob-coxs-history-of-online-terrorism.html

• [takeshi]

  Wow.

  I just read every word of your post, as well as every comment left there. I should really be asleep right now. I can’t believe I read it all, but I did.

  And having done so, I should say what a fine bit of digging you did. Even if this Cox character and Robertissimo turn out to be unrelated in any way (an eventuality, I’ll admit, that I am not entirely prepared to accept) you certainly landed a one-two punch, as evidenced by Mr. Cox’s repeated and increasingly embarrassing attempts at self- and Net-validation.

  Great work.

• [Takuan]

  and that is all I need to know about Robert Cox.
  There is no way in hell I would want such a person representing me in ANY capacity.

• [Takuan]

  I will be expressing my very specific desire to my political representatives that that they take pains to speak to the web directly – instead of relying on conventional,pre-existing media (like reporters for AP). I do not wish my news “interpreted” for me any more. Too bad if this upsets people who went to great effort to learn journalism.

• [salsaman]

  There’s no room for negotiation– neither AP nor any “bloggers association” [great oxymoron btw] has any kind of authority to negotiate for my fair use.

• [Al Fear]

  And in other news… SCO have promised to meet with the owners of Linux to discuss the purchase of SCO’s Licences for the Linux kernel.

  Seriously… I hope that 2 of those words aren’t “fair” and “balanced” because they’re already taken… oops I used them, sorry BoingBoing I hope you don’t get sued.

• [cinemajay]

  @27, Tak, I’m trying to see your pov but just can’t. How are bloggers not interpreting things for you? The whole point of blogging is to present things as you see them–not just in words, but also in story selection and editorial process. Journalism is much more than just “how to write a story.” (Or even “how to spin a story”.) It’s learning investigative skills, discussing ethics (shocking, I know! More on that later).

  But the education of journalists entails all of these aspects and more. Whether they are USED or not, is another story. In fact, a friend of mine at one of the local TV stations here in the Twin Cities is often lamenting the lack of application of these principals. He’s doing less “journalism” and more blogging on the news website! The sad truth is many journalists are DESPERATE to do what they’ve been trained to do: find the news of the day and report it. Find stories yearning to be told, and bring them to the people.

  Media outlets have taken to blaming–you guessed it–blogs, for changing the landscape of news to the point where accuracy and depth no longer apply. Only the all mighty scoop is worth paying heed. I’m not so sure that I agree that’s the case, I think these trends have been brought on by media that canibalizes itself and looks for gratifying audiences immediately rather than competently.

  To circle back to your comment: you’re not alone. The majority of readers, listeners, viewers believe they are getting some spin.

  And they are. From news room editorial chiefs and corporate tycoons with money to make.

  All I’m saying that a blanket statement against journalists is misplaced, unfair, and in the end–not productive. Place your ire where it belongs. At the feet of the Rupert Murdochs of the world.

• [kyledeb]

  Daily Kos, Techcrunch, Gawker, and now Boing Boing have written posts on this Media Bloggers Association. Liza Sabater at Culture Kitchen clears it all up.

  Bottom line is that the Media Bloggers Association doesn’t claim to represent anyone. They were just called for legal help when the Drudge Report first had legal trouble with the Associated Press.

• [maryhodder]

  Thanks Cory for the update. Really appreciate your help with this and getting things straight! You rock!

• [Alessandro Cima]

  Anyone has every right they would ever need to negotiate anything at all with anyone at all. Mr. Cox and his organization can assert that they represent any number of bloggers that they like and they can go negotiate all sorts of things with Associated Press. If AP wanted to negotiate with poets they’d have to pick one or several to talk to, wouldn’t they? What qualifies any organization to speak for any group or trade? I kind of admire fellows like this Mr. Cox who set up a persona and a little organization and act like it’s something important. This is what the web is all about. It’s wild and wonderful and I think I will be very curious to read what Mr. Cox comes up with next.

  The rather hysterical ranting against him strikes me as somewhat overdone. BoingBoing can just as easily phone up the AP and schedule a negotiation I’m sure. Yes, copyright law has nothing to do with these negotiations or meetings or whatever they are. But fair use is not well defined in the realm of this rather new blog medium. I regularly see blog sites that capture other people’s blog articles in their entirety and spew them out with ad revenue in mind. I’d be mad about this if I were Associated Press too. They are quite right to be mad and to make a stink.

  I would also be somewhat nervous about directly calling Mr. Cox a racist. It seems to me that a representative of BoingBoing should know better. Such an assertion could give Mr. Cox an unanticipated avenue of response. Just a cautionary remark…

• [Tgg161]

  I used to work for a political media firm in DC, and we worked with all sorts of organizations with names like ‘Doctor’s Association of Medicine’ that were just one or two people with a box of letterhead.

  It’s not hard (or uncommon) for some nut with an opinion to found an authoritatively-named organization and try to be the voice of one side of an argument in the media.

• [Antinous]

  Liza,

  No bloglinks or signature line in your posts, please.

• [Takuan]

  sorry Cinemajay, my lousy effort there. What I mean is they (politicians)can bloody well open their own sites and put their words down in their own hand and not be able to blame reporters (or bloggers) for “twisting” them. Let the politicos blog themselves. There will still be plenty of comment, old school journalistic and blogger both. Some already do, but most don’t.

• [rcade]

  As the person at the eye of this particular blogstorm, I am disappointed that you passed along Teresa Nielsen Hayden’s critique of the Media Bloggers Association without digging into how they got involved.

  I asked them for help at the recommendation of other bloggers I trust, including Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen. They did this before any reporters expressed an interest in the dispute.

  The group’s not a sham association set up to provide cover for AP or claim a role for itself as the kings of the blogosphere. For several years, Robert Cox’s group has helped bloggers who find themselves in legal battles, as I did.

  I write about their involvement in more detail here:

  http://www.cadenhead.org/workbench/news/3370

  As a leader in defending online civil liberties, you ought to talk to Cox about the growing number of lawsuits and legal challenges faced by bloggers — most of whom aren’t as fortunate as I’ve been in drawing attention to the situation.

• [mdhatter]

  Teresa, you are a gem.

• [cinemajay]

  Agreed. Also, wasn’t meaning to get all up in your grill. I think my soapbox drama card for the month has been punched!

• [Danny O’Brien]

  Hey Liza,

  Just to clarify:

  > Can I go to the EFF if the FBI approaches one of my bloggers?
  >
  > Can I go to the EFF if Mattel order a take down?

  Absolutely. If we can’t directly help your case (and we often can), have a system in place that will try and find you pro-bono legal counsel in your state as quickly and effectively as possible. We are in contact with over 250 attorneys with an interest and experience in digital law who are used to receiving such requests from us. If any BB readers are in this position please tell them to email [e-mail] or call [phone]. It’s part of our remit.

• [O3]

  @#9: If you truly cared about bloggers, not just your client, you’d accept that your actions and meeting are/will be pre-emptively exploitative of bloggers everywhere, and cancel the meeting until larger representation can arrive on both sides.

  Boy, Howdy! Nowhere have I seen anyone stating that this MBA claims to care about all bloggers, not should it care about all bloggers, and isn’t the whole brouhaha about how wrong it is for MBA to (allegedly) claim it stands for all bloggers? So which is it, you do, or you do NOT, want the MBA to be a single issue org representing a single client? It seems whatever MBA actually does, it just can’t win at this point, all because the blogosphere ate up what AP said in some article without any attempt at verifying the facts for themselves. SIGH.

• [bardfinn]

  #6:

  That still does not change the fact that the law trumps any privately negotiated agreements, especially when those privately negotiated agreements are implied to be applicable to an unconsulted third party.

  In short: Fair Use is the Law, and no-one may undertake to contractually subvert the law.

• [rcade]

  That’s not what is taking place here, Bardfinn. The MBA isn’t in the business of limiting bloggers’ rights. When they have participated in helping a blogger settle a legal dispute, there are terms they will never agree to — for instance, they won’t settle a libel suit by removing true information from the web.

  In this case, the idea that they’re engaged in a blogger/media peace summit, and will emerge from AP with fair use commandments we all must heed, is a bit of hyperbole fed by some of the media reports.

• [liza]

  Cry,

  Y shld knw bttr thn t wr Nlsn’s tn fl ht. Y ls ght t knw bttr tht, f ny blggr gt C&D nd ndd mmdt pr-bn lgl cnsl, th FF S NT QPPD T D THT.

  Ths s why ppl lk Jff Jrvs, Rbcc McKnnn, JD Lsc nd thrs bcm th fndng mmbrs f th MB.

  Cn g t th FF f th FB pprchs n f my blggrs?

  Cn g t th FF f Mttl rdr tk dwn?

  Ths ppl, spclly Rn Clmn wh s th prmry lgl cnsl fr th MB d n mzng jb f hlpng hndrds f blggrs thrgh vrty f lgl hssls. M ncldd, btw.

  Thy nvr clmd t rprsnt T LL th blgsphr. Hnsll bsclly ld (th NYT s n P mmbr) nd tht l ws crrd n by nn thr thn th P n nthr rtcl prrtng th “w’r wrtng gdlns wth ths gy”.

  N thy’r nt. Thy’r dlng wth Rgrs wh ws bsclly stnwlld fr mnths by th P lgl dprtmnt.

  f ll ppl Cry, hw cld y bsclly bcm tl f th Ps spn?

  /lz

  Lz Sbtr, Pblshr
  http://cltrktchn.cm

• [boyhowdy]

  Rcade’s evidence seems to be as follows:

  1. He asked them for help. They helped.
  2. They have helped a finite list of other people, who continue to recommend them.

  This is all well and good, whether or not Cox is “the organization,” or not, and whether or not he should be, or not.

  The question here, though, was not “is the MBA really kewl!!!!!”

  No, the question is, and needs to remain, “do the MBA have the right to negotiate copyright with the AP on behalf of OTHER bloggers.”

  And without a democratic process which legitimizes any representative unior, organization, or group, the answer surely is no.

  And we need to be saying so to the AP, over and over and over, immediately, or we run the risk of losing out to Cox and his supporters, regardless of their legitimacy, if only because otherwise, the AP will be able to CLAIM legitimacy, and ignore us from then on.

  Look. RCADE thinks we will be “helped” somehow by talking to Cox (notably, this would provide exactly the legitimacy he desires), and that somehow, that conversation will provide “evidence” — though RCADE’s sense that “bloggers face many legal issues” is in no way evidence that any one particular group or organization or individual should be the one to HELP us when that happens.

  I can see how this is annoying — it’s easy to get sucked in when some pompous fool (oh yes, I’ve read his work) and his easily led followers (who notably include PBS authors and other perfectly legitimate and well-meaning folks) claims to speak for you.

  It would be nice, in other words, if RCADE and his ilk “get” the fact that some bloggers have voluntarily accepted MBA authority and support is NOT evidence for whether or not the MBA has the right to speak for the vast majority of bloggers, who have NOT accepted MBA authority and support.

  But it would be nicer if we could come through this AP thing with our rights intact AND without selling ourselves out to some guy who got there first, no matter HOW helpful he is.

  Given that, we should now be worrying about making sure the AP understands that. And, now that we’ve shown bloggers that the MBA isn’t supported well within the blogging “community” (whatever that is), we should NOT be worrying about whether the MBA and its supporters “get it” — that would be nice, but it isn’t relevant, here.

  And thus, I have already spent enough time worrying about it, and would urge others — most especially “the Boing Boing four,” who do this especially well — to move on to direct petition/contact/recruitment of the REAL folks we trust to speak to the AP about our side. Please.

  Sadly, RCADE’s approach is not new. Those others who have also accepted MBA use a similar tactic. The fact that they seem to be arguing against something else entirely seems to be getting lost on them. F them, then.

  But if it gets lost on US, we’re in big, big trouble.

  The fact that we are pushing for Canadian grass-roots push-back in the Canadian DMCA case is great, and as an American, I’ve done what little I can. But if we cannot quickly rally the same kind of response — if, in other words, we cannot put aside the question who represents bloggers in order to get to the true heart of the matter — we may well lose the AP fight. Please, Cory, others — Don’t fall for it. Where is the grassroots “do this to fight the AP decision” rallying cry? Please?

• [Robotech_Master]

  Since I had to dig down 2/3 of the way through the Making Light comments (which were generally slagging on MBA, slagging on Rogers Cadenhead for having the temerity to defend MBA, and even a couple of people sockpuppeting Robert Cox making “I’m evil, bwahaha,” statements) before finding this, and I’m not sure anyone else would have the patience to do so, here is the real Robert Cox speaking on behalf of his organization. In particular, he notes that the “guidelines” he was coming up with were not guidelines for bloggers, they were guidelines for the Associated Press’s responses to them. He states that

  Seems to me like this could be an example of the old “telephone game” striking again—information getting distorted as it passes through multiple levels of reportage.

  I’m not taking sides pro or con the MBA, but I always get irritated when people go off half-cocked based on stories that aren’t necessarily completely accurate.

• [boyhowdy]

  Oh, one last note:

  Liza at Culture Kitchen, who RCADE and others have directed us to, CLAIMS to want what I want. She says:

  It just mystifies me how most bloggers are reacting to the AP spin and then attacking Robert Cox when it should be the opposite. They should be questioning why AP is saying the meeting is about setting standards, when Rogers and Bob have announced the meeting is about taken care of Rogers problems with AP –problems that Rogers want to have solved in part by AP issuing in writing what exactly do they want.

  Notably, however, this confirms that Cox, Rogers and co. will be “pushing” the AP to come out with a definitive standard — which is itself a dangerous thing, which would entrench their position, and lead us down the path of shouting over language on paper.

  The very act of creating such a document is dangerous. If we NEEDED proof that Cox and co should NOT be representing us, their goals here, as stated by Liza, are ample evidence.

  For Liza to claim that the BMA is being treated as a “fall guy” here is terribly naive, given the entirely dangerous result they think they can get out of that meeting.

  That she goes on to point out that we should be focusing on the AP is right on the button. It is only her implication that we should be doing so by supporting this entirely damaging, scary, dumb strategy that makes me very, very afraid.

  So, again, BoingBoingers: where is the better way? Where is the grassroots? Where is the wave that we can join, that will overwhelm the MBA legitimacy, and get the AP to back down, instead of stepping up with paperwork?

• [Robotech_Master]

  Whoops, disregard the dangling “He states that”. (Wish I could go back in and edit that. :)

• [Robotech_Master]

  Another comment from Cox, from further down the page, addressing whether he claims to “represent the blogosphere.”

  As I’ve already said elsewhere, I have never ever said that I represent “bloggers” and the accounts of this in the newspapers and blogs are entirely false. So, there is nothing to “make clear” to the AP. Do you actually think that AP is so unaware of the new media landscape that they would think for a moment that there is one person or one organization that can enter into some sort of collective bargaining agreement for bloggers?

  To put your mind at easy, when I walk in to meet with the AP tomorrow I will be sure to tell them I do not represent “the blogosphere”.

• [mujadaddy]

  The American Life Policy Institute will now be taking over negotiations. Donations to my, er, I mean, the Institute’s PayPal account to cover expenses are appreciated.

• [cinemajay]

  I don’t think the AP can dictate what anyone decides to post through fair use. That said, I think the heart of the issue is far too many bloggers have no real idea what “fair use” constitues or how to use it. The AP wants to set guidelines because no one else has or is willing to start.

  You don’t have to have a law degree, a pass high school writing class, or even spend five minutes understanding what is acceptable usage. That’s the beauty of blogging–and possibly it’s greatest flaw.

  I’ve read posts that either use entire passages far exceeding fair usage, don’t mention how the information was attained (freely from creator?), or occassionaly lift content that would otherwise be called plagarism. But it’s okay, because it’s just a blog dude!

  Is this the norm? Hard to say. But “no experience necessary” in public exposition means exactly that.

• [boyhowdy]

  “To put your mind at easy, when I walk in to meet with the AP tomorrow I will be sure to tell them I do not represent “the blogosphere”.”

  Thanks for the straw man! But the deeper issues here remain, even if you choose to pretend we are arguing about who the MBA “represents”.

  The very act of walking into that meeting with the expressly stated goal of getting the AP to write down, for the very FIRST time, their position TO YOU, in RESPONSE to that meeting, says what it needs to, Mr Cox/Sockpuppet. If you truly cared about bloggers, not just your client, you’d accept that your actions and meeting are/will be pre-emptively exploitative of bloggers everywhere, and cancel the meeting until larger representation can arrive on both sides.

  Instead, winning the battle while losing the war before everyone else even arrives at the battlefield kind of puts your client above the society, doesn’t it? Even lawyers are asked to take an oath to the law first and foremost…

• [rcade]

  “Where is the grassroots? Where is the wave that we can join, that will overwhelm the MBA legitimacy, and get the AP to back down, instead of stepping up with paperwork?”

  That’s a great question. If somebody wants to start a new group or a new effort to better represent the common interests of bloggers than the MBA in cases like this, more power to ‘em.

  But in the meantime, they’re there, and I speak from experience when I say it’s nice to have somebody take your call when your blog attracts the attention of lawyers. The MBA was involved before this got any press.

• [Jeff]

  “What he’s really into is self-aggrandizement”

  Wow, that sort of thing is so rare in the blogosphere. I’ve never heard of something like that. Feeding one’s ego on one’s own site? Now, when did self-promotion become a sin on Boing Boing? Hmmmm? Oh, how rich.

• [liza]

  thanks for the update Cory.

• [aelfscine]

  How much you wanna bet this continuing story doesn’t get much AP coverage?

• [Robotech_Master]

  @16: If you want to post your comments where Cox might see them, you should follow the link and do so over on Making Light. I was just quoting him here in the interest of latecomers getting his side of the story.

• [maryhodder]

  Cory,
  The media bloggers association is *not* representing bloggers generally to the AP. AP and the NYTimes misreported that, and I’ve asked for a correction/retraction on my blog here:

  http://napsterization.org/stories/archives/000704.html

  If you look at this post from Liza Sabatier/Culture Kitchen, you’ll see that Rogers Cadenhead asked MBA to represent them to AP re: the 7 C&Ds.. and that’s what todays meeting with AP is about:

  http://culturekitchen.com/liza/blog/exclusive_robert_cox_answers_some_questions_about_

  MBA is not representing the blogosphere to get a policy. They simply suggested to AP that at a later date, they meeting with a variety of bloggers and get a policy in place so that people know what to do.

  In fact, I wonder about a policy, because I’d rather follow the constitution and fair use as guidelines when quoting a news story.

  mary

• [maryhodder]

  One other thing, Jeff Jarvis, Jay Rosen, O
  Willis, Rebecca MacKinnon and Micah Sifry are founding members of the Media Bloggers Association.

  They are vouching for them today. I don’t know the MBA at all and don’t remember their founding at the November 2004 Bloggercon where Dave Winer says it started.

  But I think we should find out more before slamming them, esp. in light of the complete misreporting by AP and misinterpretation by NYT of the story that MBA was negotiationing a policy in the first place.

• [cinemajay]

  @19, You’d think so. But actually Wired ran a lengthy piece on this from AP’s business division:

  http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/A/AP_BLOGGERS?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-06-17-07-23-32

• [takeshi]

  @ boyhowdy:

  I thank you for your input here. It is much needed, apparently.

  @ rcade:

  “If somebody wants to start a new group or a new effort to better represent the common interests of bloggers than the MBA in cases like this, more power to ‘em.”

  What? Are you kidding? I think that ANY group might “better represent the common interests of bloggers” (cat macros? self-promotion?) at this point. Please read: it would appear that a good number of prominent bloggers don’t WANT this guy’s help. I imagine that even fewer not-so-prominent bloggers would want his help, if they even knew who he was.

  @ Jeff:

  I don’t want to speak for Teresa, but it seemed to me that her point was less about how self-aggrandizing he is, and more about how POINTLESSLY self-aggrandizing he is. This is a guy whose definition of blogging seems to be: “the act of talking about blogging, as if you know what you’re talking about, even if you don’t.”

  Don’t get me wrong. I’m such that Bob Cox is a swell individual, but I don’t need him voicing any of my concerns to the AP, and I’ve been blogging since well before it was even called that. I think. Nonetheless, it is important to note, as was pointed out on Teresa’s site, that this gentleman is so damned bloggy, he gets emotional when his fellow Netizens don’t pick up the phone to call him.

  Blog on!