In his Media Decoder blog, David Carr notes a court ruling this week that has potential implications for Americans asserting themselves as journalists.

A blogger who was sued for defamation could not use Oregon's law to defend her use of material from a source --- in effect to try to shield her from the suit --- because the court ruled she was not entitled to the privileged position of mainstream media the law provides.

The court noted she was not affiliated with a media organization or entity. The law was written before blogging emerged. She has been ordered to pay $2.5 million in damages in the case.

Her defence was unusual, in that she was asserting the offending post was based on an anonymous source. She argued she deserved protection as a publisher under the law. 

While experts believe the ruling will have little effect on journalism, it will stimulate debate on the definition of a journalist in the digital age and the possible need for legal reform to reflect the new definition. 

The Ontario Superior Court has set a new framework for defamation with political bloggers. In a new ruling it says that the context of blogger debates might make it possible to exchange libels without penalty.

The court said the context of the platform, with lots of freewheeling comments in the mix, might mitigate what would otherwise be considered a libel. If someone were expecting a rejoinder, for instance, the first remarks might not be problematic. The case recognized the different dynamic of an Internet debate.

It is more than likely the case will be appealed, but the ruling sets a different tone for the standards of political blogging on message boards in Ontario, Canada's largest jurisdiction and often a precedent-setting place for communications and media. This case is bound to be watched as it moves up in the justice system.

The head of the Center for Journalism Ethics at University of Wisconsin in Madison (disclosure: a former colleague at UBC and The Canadian Press) has distilled his academic work on changing ethics into a post for the PBS MediaShift site.

In it, Stephen Ward argues that many concepts associated with journalism ethics --- particularly the "false model" of objectivity --- need redefining in the digital age. He suggests that the "just the facts" notion of objectivity is outdated. Rather, objectivity needs to be a method by which information is gathered and an ideal that helps guide the journalist.

Ward says educators need to find ways to identify ethical guidelines and best practices in all forms of journalism, including perspectival journalism and live-blogging, to ensure that truth-telling and accuracy remain in the picture. The fear that teaching perspectival journalism means lowering standards is wrong, he suggest.

"The issue is not whether certain media formats are inherently unethical. The issue is what norms are appropriate for any specific format," he writes. "We need both comprehensive principles and specific guidelines that allow students to engage new media in a creative but responsible manner."

The Economist is staging one of its house debates this week to accompany a special report on the news industry. In it, NYU professor Jay Rosen and University of California at Berkeley professor Nicholas Carr --- both avid bloggers and authors --- debate whether the Internet has made journalism better. Rosen says so, Carr says not so.

Their statements, rebuttals and debate will be featured all week. Rosen's opening is that he feels the cost of entry has declined, so more can participate; Carr's is that the Internet has thinned the ranks of the professional class. They've already amassed some substantial public comments.

I've started the blog at CBC in my new role as Ombudsman with an introductory note that sets out a few thoughts on the position. But these are very early days and I'll get my footing in the time ahead.
The blog is part of a larger site that contains the many reviews from the Office over the years on an array of issues brought to it. It's my intention to post them as they're completed and blog on relevant matters to the work.
Meantime, this blog will reflect those posts and add other material from time to time that discusses the relationship between the public and journalistic organizations.  I want the two places to neither clash nor overlap, so I expect this will be a work in progress for some time. Your suggestions are welcome.

The TNS research firm has released the largest-ever study of media use behaviour. Not surprisingly it points to rapid adoption of the Internet. But it also demonstrates that several countries are embracing digital more rapidly than are others.

Among the highlights of the study:

1. The Internet has surpassed television as the most-used medium.
2. Rapid-growth markets like China and Egypt have surpassed mature markets.
3. Blogging and social networking are blooming in these rapid-growth markets.
4. Social networking growth has been spurred by the rise of mobile.
5. As email wanes, social networking rises.