Blogs can get hoaxed, or mislead (sorry to Iran’s president)
Turns out that CNN, among others, is reporting that Iran’s president’s blog doesn’t have malware or viruses after all. So, how could I report such yesterday? I wasn’t reporting, just passing along information I had from a reputable technical source (O’Reilly).
Blogs can get hoaxed. But, if they do the truth does come out eventually. I try to update my posts as I learn more information. If you see something incorrect that I’m reporting, just point it out in the comments. Thanks!
Powered By 
August 16th, 2006 at 5:18 pm
I’m sure the “President” of Iran would gladly pass on malware and much worse to any Israeli or Jew in the world. No apologies to him are needed.
-DJ
August 16th, 2006 at 5:47 pm
Thx for correction as that story sounded fishy.
But sometime I’d like to hear about your thoughts concerning global politics and blogging. Clearly blogs will become the next political battleground. I think that’s a good thing though it will also fuel the tendency of humans to get wrapped up with hysterical propaganda rather than reason. How can bloggers help foster/force/encourage openess in closed societies as those societies start to use blogs propagandistically rather than righteously.
August 16th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
he may, and he may not, but the apology comes to us the readers. and do you know what passing along info without caring about it’s truth is called? sometimes, it’s called spreading rumors.
August 16th, 2006 at 6:36 pm
The degree of mindless demonization of the Iranian President pushed by the Looney Right is getting laughable.
When the reformist Khatami was elected president and he tried to reach out to the US, the same Rightwingers claimed that he should be ignored because Iranian presidents are powerless (doesn’t control the military, the intelligence etc)
But as soon as Ahmadinejad becomes president, all of a Sudden Iranian presidents are “The Leader of Iran!”
And the same Looney Rights is now claiming that when Ahmadinejad said that Iran would respond to the US/EU nuclear offer “by the end of next month” on Aug 22, that means that Iran intends to nuke the world on that day because it supposedly corresponds to some religious holiday — but in fact it also corresponds to the end of the Iranian month of Mordad.
And oh! He wants to “nuke” people - while the US president has blatantly stated that dropping nuclear weapons on IRan is an “option” he’s keeping open. Oh! he wants to “Kill Jews” — while Israel is killing people right and left and denying the Palestinians their right to exist.
Who is the threat to the world here?
Oh and incidentally, he was elected pretty democratically even by US standards. Sure he was selected to participate in the elections - but so are the US presidential candidates. How else do you think we only get two choices for president in the US? Money is the factor that we use to determine who is “selected” to run for office — money from large wealthy corporations.
August 16th, 2006 at 6:40 pm
Um, it wasn’t a hoax in as much as the original blogger did see a Symantic warning when she accessed the khamenei.ir site.
This was a problem with Symantec’s software.
Yeah, I know I’m being pedantic, but the original blogger reported correctly on what she saw.
August 16th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
[...] UPDATE — It turns out that according to CNN there is no virus, I’ll keep you posted as things develop. [...]
August 16th, 2006 at 7:33 pm
[...] Update 2 (8/16/06): the latest word is that Ahmadinejad’s blog does not contain a trojan. For more, including technical details on what caused the initial alarm, see here (thanks, Steve). [...]
August 16th, 2006 at 9:08 pm
Haas, No presidential candidate is selected to participate in the elections in the US. ANYONE that meets the requirments set out by the constitution can put have their name on the ballot to run for President. Perhaps you are confusing this with winning the nomination from a specific political party. If you think we only get two choices for President, then it is quite obvious you have never set foot in a voting booth. So, your opinions about the US Presidential election process are pretty much worthless.
If you are citizen, God help us. If you are not and plan to be, then I suggest some serious studying before taking the test.
Can you explain why Ahmadinejad seems to want to deny that the Holocaust occured? Go read his interview in Der Spiegel if you think I’m making it up.
August 16th, 2006 at 9:19 pm
LayZ: you’re not making it up. My wife is Iranian and she tells me all about it. She never even knew that the holocaust existed before she came to America (they don’t teach that in schools in Iran).
August 16th, 2006 at 9:33 pm
> I wasn’t reporting, just passing along information I had from a reputable technical source (O’Reilly).
I’m not sure i grok the distinction being made btw “reporting” and “passing along information”. Whatever your own internal distinction is btw the two, the outcome to yr reader would seem to be the same, no?
This is not a criticism of your having reported, er, “passed along” the information, but i am trying to understand what genuine difference you think there is btw the two acts in terms of their effects on your readers and in terms of how one uses the word “report”.
There may be different levels of _effort_ btw doing one’s own original research (checking multiple sources, confirming facts, etc.) and repeating other people’s research, but they are both “reporting” once you’re publicly restating it/linking to it, no?
This isn’t an argument to say “everything is journalism’, just that when we make statements on a blog, we have to take some level of responsibility for them. Which to your credit you do (you apologize for passing wrong information on) and then which in the exact same statement you also seem to not do (’hey, this wasn’t really my fault for passing wrong information on, as i didn’t check it myself (”wasn’t actually reporting”). the latter seems to say “uh, yes, i did pass on the rumor that you have scabies but i’m not to blame for passing it on, as i didn’t check the facts myself, i just reported it, uh, i mean repeated it, i, uh, i mean, just passed it along to everyone else in the school.” we can call it report/repeat/ pass along/ but the effect in propogating the information is the same and the distinction (if there was any to begin with) becomes meaningless.
not trying to come down on you for having linked to something that turned out to be false, just fascinated by the attempt to draw a distinction btw reporting and passing along-especially since, to bring up another oft discussed issue-a lot of “everyday journalism” _is_ just passing things along, vs doing significant indepedent investigations into the truthfulness of what is said.
August 16th, 2006 at 9:45 pm
Ben: when i say “reporting” I mean doing your own original research. I didn’t say “I found.” That’s a good tip off that I didn’t do the original research here. Passing along is also reporting of a sort, but it’s reporting what I found on someone else’s site that I usually trust. That’s a far cry from me actually tearing into the HTML and finding a problem myself.
August 16th, 2006 at 10:21 pm
[...] Now they’re saying there’s no malware on Ahmadenijad’s blog. [...]
August 16th, 2006 at 10:38 pm
So, in essenence you were being lazy (no pun intended). I would think even the most generic high school newspaper reporter would think to question and double check information he was chosing to pass along. This seems to be one of the “problems” with blogging. People link first and ask questions later. Gotta tell ya, you’re not being a good ambassador for whatever journalism school you dropped out of.
August 16th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
LayZ: if you were promised journalism quality stuff here please leave now. Won’t find it here. Thank you very much.
When you pay me $.75 a day, like you do for a newspaper, then you can try holding me to those standards.
August 16th, 2006 at 11:45 pm
But yet you defend that doofus in San Fran that’s keeping information from the govt about crimes committed against the police because…well.. he’s a journalist. So which is it? Is a blogger a journalist or not? Or is he only a journalist when there is some pet cause to defend?
let’s go to the videotape… in the comments in that post about the Josh doofus you said in response to Brent asking if a 12 year old blogger is a journalist:
“Brent: yes. She is a journalist too. Deal with it. I hate that you brought a kid into this, though, cause they don’t have adult rights so it’s not easy to answer your question here.
So, let me restate your question: “is a college student who has a MySpace page a journalist?” Absolutely yes, is my answer.
There is no credential for journalism. Deal with it.
Stop being elitist. Or, do you feel the words “all men are created equal” only applies to certain people who have professional credentials?”
So.. I’m now completely confused on what your position is. Lemme see if I got it straight. Correct me if I’m wrong regarding your definition:
A blogger is NOT a journalist when they get called out for being lazy in doing any research on their posts Bloggers ARE journalists when he govt wants to subpeona information they may have in the effort to prosecute a possible crime being committed.
Do I have that right?
August 16th, 2006 at 11:53 pm
Primaries! And there are more than two choices just to let you know. Other parties exist. How old are you? Ever heard of Ralph Nader or Ross Perot, for instance? I predict that in ‘08, if John McCain isn’t the Republican nominee, he will run as an Independant, and he will win. The people are very ready for third party candidates.
@Scoble, just to set the record straight, I whole-heartedly support the people of Iran. It is the tyrannical regime that I feel must be stopped. Similarly, I support the good and decent people of Iraq, but not Saddam Hussein, nor the terrorists who want to stop the democratic process there.
I just don’t want you to get the wrong idea. I am a very tolerant person, and very much respect diversity, especially of religion. Everybody has the right to believe whatever they want, as long as it does not hurt other people.
A mentor of mine from college came from Jordan, and I have great respect for the man. Yes, he is a devout Muslim. I say, good for him, I am glad that he is spiritual. We have had some interesting discussions about religion, and have asked and answered some very interesting questions amongst one another. He didn’t know that much about Christianity, and I didn’t know that much about Islam. It was a learning experience, and we totally respect each other’s beliefs. And he is a true super-geek! This guy knows his stuff, and it is a lot! I’m sure you’d like him a lot.
@hass, where did you come up with your rhetoric? What right-wingers are talking about this? Is it some blogger, or an actual official of the right-wing -like a representative or something?
You state that only right-wingers demonize Madman Argmegeddon-Jihad. Does that mean that every Democrat that has also done this, including John Kerry, is a right-winger, for having demonized Ahmadinejad?
The fact is, that the guy is a madman, and it is shameful if Americans actually support his anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Europe rhetoric. This guy hates us, and you want to shake his “glorious” hand?
Once again folks, the term useful idiot comes to mind. Just like he did to Mike Wallace, Madman Armageddon-Jihad, the new Hitler, would laugh right in your face, for kissing his butt!
It boggles my mind that you don’t see this. And just so you know, I am not a right-winger at all. I am a moderate Independant, and never follow party lines. I am a free thinker, and always espouse the power of truth.
Partisan politics totally sucks when your country is at war. Please don’t contribute to making it worse.
August 17th, 2006 at 12:08 am
LayZ: a blogger is a journalist when they are doing real journalism. Journalism is doing original reporting, not just saying “hey, that newspaper over there has an interesting story.”
Translation: you gotta do a little work here in READING what I’m doing. If I’m interviewing a CEO about his or her company, that’s journalism.
If I’m pointing to an article somewhere else, that’s bookmarking or linking, but I don’t think it quite comes up to the bar.
Oh, and, again, who said what I do is journalism?
Josh’s stuff WAS journalism cause his images got used in professional media (without getting compensated at first, I might add).
I notice something about you. You stretch too far to poke me in the ribs. That’s the problem with critics like yourself. You only can critique. You can’t actually do any original thinking.
I think that’s why blogging bothers you. That means you actually need to engage your brain and get involved. Something you’re incapable of, though, because you don’t have a blog of your own and you don’t want to use your real name here. At least with Christopher Coulter I can buy him sushi once in a while and say “thanks” for the counterpunching.
August 17th, 2006 at 12:17 am
Robert, I agree with your above post and by no means am I trying to dig on you.
But this does point out an issue I’m concerned with - having our primary source of info and communications being the internet has, IMO, degraded our critical thinking skills. Digg is a perfect example. Look how many stupid comments are made by people Digging a story who clearly never read it? Or the number of people who believe whatever’s posted without ever bothering to analyze it and verify it?
Blogs suffer the same problem, as I can post whatever I want, or I can read someone else’s blog without truly thinking about it. The problem is that people are in such a rush to get in and get out, they scan stuff and it goes in but never truly gets processed. People’s multitasking and the huge increase in ways to communicate and get information means “more activity, less results.”
This can’t be good for the future of mankind. It can only lead to MORE misundertandings and MORE communication problems that the world doesn’t need.
Not to mention dumber people. Cough::Digg::cough
August 17th, 2006 at 5:14 am
Why hasn’t the President of Iran apologized for insisting that Israel be wiped off of the map? Why hasn’t he apologized for supplying arms to the Hezbullies? Why didn’t Mike Wallace ask him about the Hidden Imam? It’s time to stop coddling these maniacs, and see them for what they are.
August 17th, 2006 at 6:59 am
Thanks for clarifying. I guess I see your point. Seriously, I was trying to understand your position, because many times it seems to change with the wind.
When did I say blogging bothers me? I find your posts entertaining because it’s always a guessing game about which Scoble will show up today.
You should take some advice from Scott. Again, it seesm many bloggers link first and ask questions later. Let’s take the example you like to use about the “power of blogging”. Say during the time you were “off the grid” a “reliable blogger” posted that you were leaving MS for PodTech but that, in fact, was NOT true. Think how that story would have spread simply because some “a-list” bloggers picked up this post from this “reliable blogger”. You would have had quite the mess to clean up once you got back “on the grid”. Scott is right, a little critical thinking can’t hurt before linking and posting.
August 17th, 2006 at 8:34 am
LayZ: that’s why my phone number is on my blog. I don’t think such a mess would last very long. Even when I am off the grid I’m reachable.
August 17th, 2006 at 9:52 am
Robert, I’ll give you $.75 any day and I won’t even expect anything in return.
August 17th, 2006 at 4:33 pm
Robert, _SO_WHAT_ if CNN says it’s a hoax? You still need to examine the core evidence, and unless you’re in an Israeli IP address I don’t know how you’d know you’re receiving that suspect content.
We’ve got to become more comfortable accepting that we don’t know certain things — a healthy agnosticism — instead of jumping from belief to belief depending on who tells us what to think. CNN doesn’t automatically trump O’Reilly, although either could come up with good observations, hypotheses, and tests.
“When you pay me $.75 a day…” We readers actually pay much more, in attention costs. That’s why there’s such pushback against unsourced rumors.
… and, for what it’s worth, I’m not pulling relevant articles from Google News with term “ahmadinejad blog source:cnn”… if you’ve got a citation I’d appreciate it, thanks.
jd
August 17th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
Scoble gets caught by his own words!
Being consistent with your points of view is great value for anyone. See here how Robert scoble is exposed by one his readers (comment #15)
I would say go and define your values first if you pretend to have some.
If you are criticizing someone and not …