WARNING: libel allowed

In most cases so far, libel laws do not affect on-line blogging. Libelists can ignore those they anger, facing little to no consequences. Photo illustration by Rachel Seymour

My father is an alcoholic sexist, and my mother has a criminal record.

No, this is not true. I made it up. Who is going to fact check my blog besides me, though?

When media starts to rely on citizen journalism, like KFTY-TV in Santa Rosa, Cal., who will be the fact checkers? Who will be responsible for false information?

Even if someone finally catches the false info, the damage could already be done.

I am not talking about damage to a blogger's credibility. I am talking about someone else's image. I am talking about blog libel.

If I do not like one of my co-workers, John Doe, what will stop me from posting stories on how he steals money from his volunteer jobs?

That sounds like news. It will get people's attention in the community. I bet I can even make up enough "facts" for a convincing story. People will always wonder about Mr. Doe like an accused rapist.

Then, what if John Doe applies for another job. His name is googled, and look what pops up.

Consequences for me: I can never be credible in the blogging word again.

Well, big deal. I was not going for credibility. I got what I wanted. I damaged Mr. Doe's name. Unfortunately, there is currently no laws threatening me or protecting people like John Doe.

Discussions on on-line libel tend to center about businesses, companies and agencies. None of which applies to an individual, citizen reporters.

Plus, there is nothing to stop a citizen journalist from creating another alias to "report" under. Anyone can blog from any Web accessible computer too.

I do not want my news from random citizens, whom I cannot trust provide the truth about their stories or even their own names.

Free-for-all, citizen journalism, like KFTY-TV, is not just annoying, it can be dangerous.