International Law

Over the last week there has been an unfortunate saga playing out in the Australian blogosphere surrounding the withdrawal of advertising by some businesses to the Domain, which is a loose collaboration among several Australian blogs to spread the benefits of the advertising to a broader pool of quality blogs.  The blogs that are part of the Domain include Jennifer Marohasy, John Passant, Henry Thornton, Skeptic Lawyer, HomePage DAILY, Andrew Bartlett, Club Troppo and Larvatus Prodeo,  The Domain was the idea of Graham Young from On Line Opinion.

The controversy began when Graham Young and On Line Opinion published last year a highly provocative article by Bill Muehlenberg attacking gay marriage, that also sparked some quite offensive comments.  Several advertisers, notably ANZ and IBM, apparently found this post and the comments objectionable, withdrew their advertising from the Domain, affecting not only On Line Opinion, but also all the other blogs who were part of the Domain.  Graham Young first commented publicly about this situation in December last year but it wasn't until last weekend that this fight became public, with a piece in The Australian by Christopher Pearson and a blog post by Helen Dale on Skepticlawyer.  On Tuesday Graham Young also wrote a piece for The Drum outlining the situation, ending with a plea for advertisers.

It seems the decision to go public with this dispute have upset some of the blogs that were part of the Domain, with both Larvatus Prodeo and Club Troppo announcing that they were withdrawing from the Domain.  I like and respect all of the protagonists in this situation (most notably Graham Young from On Line Opinion, Mark Bahnisch from Larvatus Prodeo and Ken Parish, Don Arthur and Nicholas Gruen from Club Troppo),  so it is a little difficult for me to comment on this situation.  Nonetheless, I do wish to make a few observations.

First, I do think it is disappointing that some advertisers opted to withdraw advertising because they disagreed Bill Muehlenberg's original piece and some of the comments made to that piece.  Of course, as private businesses they are perfectly entitled to do so (this is not in any way censorship), but On Line Opinion has always published a wide range of commentary from many different political spectrums and I would have hoped that its advertiers were not only aware of that when they begun advertising but also that they would have been prepared to show some fortitude when presented with a provocative piece they do not agree with.

Second, it seems to me that much of the controversy has focused less on the original decision to publish Bill Muehlenberg's piece, and more on the different attitudes towards comment moderation taken by some of the blogs that were part of the Domain.  In particular, both Club Troppo and Larvatus Prodeo have adopted a more robust approach to comment moderation than On Line Opinion and would have been more proactive in taking down comments that they considered to be unacceptable vilification.  My own general attitude to comment moderation aligns more closely with that of Graham Young and On Line Opinion.  I am very reluctant to remove comments from my blog unless it is clear that such comments are unlawful (such as, defamation, invasion of privacy or copyright infringement).  I take the view that rather than silencing particular points of view - no matter how upsetting or ill informed - it is better to allow the comment to stand and have others respond.

Third, it also seems to me that the decision by Larvatus Prodeo and Club Troppo to leave the Domain was at least in part as a result of the decision by Graham Young and others to take the fight public, instead of privately negotiating with the advertising agency and the aggrieved advertisers in trying to come up with an agreeable solution.  While I have no doubt that Graham Young felt he had little choice in going public with this situation and that he hoped to garner support (and maybe other advertisers) by doing so, it is clear that it has also made things understandably quite awkward for some of the other blogs in the Domain that have different political perspectives and different attitudes to comment moderation.  In this respect I understand why both Larvatus Prodeo and Club Troppo felt bound to leave the Domain and in so doing so, distance themselves from Graham Young, On Line Opinion and the original piece by Bill Muehlenberg.

Fourth, this situation highlights the relatively fragile nature of the Australian independent political blogosphere.  Outside the ABC (The Drum), Fairfax (and the National Times), News Limited (The Punch), and to a lesser degree Crikey, there are really only a handful of widely read, influential political blogs, all of which struggle to make very much money at all (which is what, in part, provoked Graham Young to set up the Domain).  If this situation damages the reputation or financial viability of any of the blogs or websites involved then that is a most unfortunate outcome indeed. 

Finally, as far as I'm concerned, On Line Opinion, Club Troppo and Larvatus Prodeo remain essential reading and will most definitely continue to be in my Google Reader.  They all make positive contributions to the political discourse in this country and I hope that these sites - and their respective online communities - continue for many years to come.  Australia needs independent political voices like these, and I hope they can find the financial support they need to continue into the future.