Oops is in a way how FBC Jax Watchdog was robbed of his anonymity.
Formerly anonymous blogger Thomas A. Rich's identity was made public after an unnecessary investigation whose details are still being unearthed in court.
Although some evidence pertaining to the involvement of Florida State Attorney Angela Corey was somehow inadvertently destroyed.
Really, and that destruction is cited as part of an argument against deposing Corey as part of the proceedings.
"Oops!" indeed.
Another injustice.
A Florida federal district court refused this week to dismiss the claim by blogger Tom Rich (FBC Jax Watchdog) that Assistant Fla. State Attorney Stephen Siegel violated Rich's right to speak anonymously, and trampled on the Establishment Clause because defendants had no secular purpose for their actions.
The lawsuit alleges Siegel issued subpoenas that helped Jacksonville police officer Robert Hinson -- who was a member of First Baptist Church of Jacksonvilla, Fla. -- identify Rich when there was no evidence of criminal activity.
Dismissed in the same action were civil claims against State Attorney Angela Corey for her office’s role.
Rich’s claims against the police officer and against First Baptist were unaffected because they weren’t involved in this motion to dismiss.
Emerging standards for unmasking anonymous bloggers were certainly not met in Rich's case.
To prevail in this instance, Rich must now prove the violations he alleges. But even at this juncture, the case is a caution for those who would twist legal authority to unmask an anonymous blogger without compelling legal justification. Abuse of power has a price.
[H/T: Religion Clause]
Pastor Mac Brunson of FBC Jacksonville, Fla., preached on Nov. 1 a sermon expressing decidedly limited remorse, apparently for statements he made in April about Thomas A. Rich, the formerly anonymous blogger who blogs at FBC Jax Watchdog.
FBC Jax Watchdog is more confident than we that the sermon is something more than a pass at damage control in the face of a lawsuit Brunson precipitated may see lost.
Review the sermon [Itunes podcast] and read FBC Jax Watchdog's view here.
Seriously? The First Amendment means the church is above the law?
First Baptist Church of Jacksonville attorneys argue that a fraud, misrepresentation and defamation suit by the formerly anonymous author of FBC Jax Watchdog should be dismissed because ruling “require excessive entanglement [by the courts] in church policies, practices and beliefs.”
That's the wrong issue.
The core issue is abuse of power to unmask the until-then anonymous author of the blog FBC Jax Watchdog, and subsequent events and statements. The suit by blogger Tom Rich appears to make no allegations with regard to protected "church policies, practices and beliefs."
Under the circumstances, the "excessive entanglement" argument seems to imply that freedom of religion is somehow attended by a right to immunity by churches from the legal consequences of their actions.
Bad argument/bad idea.
The most important general public issue is the failure of law enforcement officials to meet or attempt to meet readily available ethical and legal standards for unmasking an anonymous blogger.
Anonymity "is sometimes required if one is to both make responsible contributions to public discourse, and also put bread on the family table." As a result, protecting blogger anonymity is a part of "protecting the discourse itself," which is at the core of our democracy. Protection of that overarching public interest in anonymity of expression has resulted in successful legal battles to prevent unmaskings whose palpable goal was to suppress free expression. But not all bloggers survive unscathed simply because they deserve to do so.
The general public interest in the protection of anonymous expression should have been addressed in court with regard to FBC Jax Watchdog, not circumvented by way of a criminal investigation which was officially closed without charges or meaningful official report. There is we feel a general public interest in seeing the debate joined in open court not, not dismissed on the basis of the FBC Jacksonville freedom of religion pretext.
The arbitrary disregard of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Department for Thomas A. Rich's right to anonymity as the FBC Jax Watchdog blogger could not meet the standards set by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals last Thursday, or of other lower courts which have ruled on similar matters.
FBC Jax Watchdog's anonymity was stripped away without prior notice in a still unsatisfactorily explained criminal investigation over which no charge was filed and which produced no court action. Although the DC case involved defamation[.pdf], the standards are nonetheless clear.
A subpoena associated with a well-pleaded claim and the opportunity to contest it are required to consider breach of online anonymity:
The consensus of the lower courts is that disclosure of an anonymous blogger's identity requires painstaking court consideration. Lack of that is not excused by the dismissive statement[.pdf] of the Jacksonville, Fla., Sheriff John Rutherford.
Sam Bayard of the Citizen Media Law Project wrote:
The court also perceived the danger of relying on procedural labels like "prima facie" and "summary judgment" and distilled the most important common feature of the competing tests in this area — that a plaintiff must make at least a substantial legal and factual showing that his/her claim has merit before a court will unmask an anonymous or pseudonymous Internet speaker.
As The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press explained, the D.C. court "noted that states vary widely in what test a defamation plaintiff must meet before it can compel a third party to turn over the identity of an anonymous speaker. Virginia, for example, 'requires only that the court be convinced that the party seeking the subpoena has a legitimate, good faith basis' for its claims. But the D.C. court ruled that this lax test 'may needlessly strip defendants of anonymity in situations where there is no substantial evidence of wrongdoing, effectively giving little or no First Amendment protection to that anonymity.' "
When anyone's First Amendment protection is trampled, we are all harmed.
FBC Jax Watchdog's anonymity was silently demolished by an unsatisfactorily explained and, from the point of view of the blogger, secret criminal investigation.
Anonymous blogs permit the relatively powerless to speak what they believe is truth, to power. Sometimes the power is a church, as we see in the confrontation between First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Fla. and FBC Jax Watchdog, and risk still attends attempting to say to power things it would prefer not to hear.
The unmasking of Thomas A. Rich as Watchdog, detailed in Florida Times-Union, closely resembles the July attempt by the Bronx (N.Y.) District Attorney to use a grand jury subpoena to unmask and silence critical anonymous bloggers and commenters on the NYC political blog site called Room 8. With the help of Public Citizen, Room 8 successfully resisted disclosure.
We do not know how Google responded to the subpoena it received. Not only does Google have an official policy of not commenting on subpoenas or other legal processes, but also, subpoenas associated with criminal investigations are typically attended by gag orders (Room 8 responded by threatening the Bronx DA's office with a countersuit). Nor has Watchdog thus far been able to obtain a copy of the subpoena he believes Comcast honored.
We do know that no wrongdoing was found, yet the investigating Jacksonville Sheriff's Department officer apparently chose to breach the blogger's anonymity by disclosing his identity to FBC Jax. We also know that Thomas A. Rich's life was disrupted as a result. He was denied access to his (now) former church, publicly excoriated in an official church action and this week was described as a "sociopath" by the pastor who has been the principal subject of his blogging.
We don't know in persuasive detail what criminal allegations were believed to justify that intrusion of police power into Rich's life and the lives of two other bloggers. As a result, whether those allegations can withstand the light of day is an open question. Serious issues of conflict of interest (the investigating officer is an FBC Jacksonville member and apparently among those who provide security there) and as a result abuse of power, have been raised by the association of the detective's investigation with attempts to silence the then anonymous blogger.
Such issues are typically best resolved by full disclosure, for this has become in considerable part a debate over public policy, and specifically over whether the force of law was properly applied. Given the issue's visibility, the local and state public officials involved must tell the truth and trust the people, or absent a thoroughly compelling explanation for silence, find themselves indicted by the appearance of concealment.
If the purpose of the investigation and disclosure was to end Watchdog's commentary on matters of general interest to his audience, it failed and those who applied the pressure have put themselves in the fire.
Ethical/legal standards not followed by law enforcement in FBC Jax case
Watchdog is unhappy that First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Fla., broadcasts on the Inspiration Network.
Watch the WCNC investigative video to decide whether you agree with Watchdog that affiliation with this group is lamentable. Chances are good that you will be troubled by at least part of what you learn.
Watchdog notes that FBC pastor Mac Brunson asked for a special offering last Easter to raise $180,000 to purchase Inspiration Network air time.
Then, illustrating why his blog has received such a Byzantine reaction from the leadership of FBC Jax, says:
I, for one, could not donate money to any organization that gives money or is associated with these "Televangelist Gunslingers", as this report calls them. I can't believe any bible-believing church would need to affiliate with the likes of these folks to spread the gospel.
Why, indeed? Not the kind of question the powerful always field well.
FBC Jax Watchdog blogged the drive by First Baptist Church, Jacksonville, Fla. to strip him of his anonymity and silence him. As Bene Diction Blogs On from Canada 
The blogger seems to have made some people who have more money than brains very nervous, because church leadership has not handled his questioning well at all from what we see in the public responses.
What has the church leadership wrought?
Some of the documents are online now; the church leadership claimed he was involved in criminal activity. Why? The overkill is stunning. Truth, humility, servant-hood took second place to power, as the mega celebrity bubble around the lead pastor tightened its grip on the minds and hearts of leadership. Most of us can’t comprehend the isolation mega-church celebrity ministers live in, nor can we comprehend the need of some to be so protective of perceived power they’ll harm in God’s name.
Avoidable harm. The entire piece is here.
History's lesson about stifling dissent, from John Adams' loss of the presidency amid backlash from his Alien and Sedition Acts to current ecclesiastical conflicts, is the same writes Wade Burleson:
One of these days men and women with power, whether it be ecclesiastical, political or corporate will learn that attempts to stifle dissent and criticism will only ultimately result in the people you lead turning against you.
In the comments, First Baptist Church, Jacksonville, Fla., Watchdog compares the "sedition" part Adams' Alien and Sedition Acts to a passage from the FBC Jax deacon's resolution, which was directed at him in a "public flogging of a former member."
You may recall that Watchdog aggressively blogged FBC Jax's policies and repressive governance, especially the pastor's accumulation of power. After a period of self-muzzled silence, Thursday brought new Watchdog coverage of the drive to strip him of his anonymity and silence him.
We look to Adams' extinct Federalist Party for the price of repressive governance. The Federalists did much good but embodied sweeping distrust of and intolerance for dissenting views.
Thursday brought us Watchdog coverage of the drive to strip him of his anonymity.
You may recall that Watchdog aggressively blogged First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Fla.'s, policies and repressive governance, especially the pastor's accumulation of power. The deacons adopted a resolution directed at him and it was approved in a vote by the congregation [video] -- after he was no longer a member there. Etc.
BaptistLife.com site administrator William Thornton observed that FBC Jacksonville conducted a "public flogging of a former member" -- a process which sounds "less Biblical than it does medieval." [Amen to that.]
We did not celebrate the earlier caesura in self-expression about matters which at every step have appeared to be legitimate public concerns. It is good to see the hard questions asked now about privacy, conflict of interest and (still) church governance. Such public debate can be redemptive by revealing the truth.
Advised to fall silent about First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Fla., "until certain on-going events run their course," the Watchdog has proclaimed himself "muzzled."
Watchdog promises to tell his story then, and it sounds both interesting and illustrative of what can befall anonybloggers:
When I tell my story, it will be the entire story of what has occured regarding this blog, the legal proceedings, Comcast subpoenas, field reports, official JSO trespass warnings ... all of it. It isn't pretty, and many people will be sorely disappointed at what has transpired in the last few months behind the scenes.
Public-spirited anonymous blogging deserves our support and defense. After all:
Do we not protect the discourse itself by protecting this one blogger?
A collapse of anonymity appears to have led to this silence -- a caesura in self-expression about matters which at every step have appeared to be legitimate public concerns.
Do not look here for a celebration of such silence.
Anonymous blogging is part of a tradition of protective self-expression whose origins predate electronic communication, as an anonymous comment at Enid, Ok., pastor Wade Burleson's blog eloquently explains:
All of this talk about anonymity has got me thinking. The term “coward” is sure getting thrown around a lot, and that is unfortunate. I wonder if anyone here has ever read or heard about the Marprelate tracts? They were written by (anonymous) Puritans in 1588-89 criticizing the abuses of Anglican bishops and clergy. They knew the consequences if they were discovered, but they could not remain silent. In fact, two men (both ministers) died (1 executed, 1 died in prison) because they were linked to the printing of the tracts. The printer, Waldegrave, had his press confiscated and was financially ruined. It is debatable whether or not the authors were ever really discovered. When the Anglican Star Chamber issued an edict in 1586 declaring that the Anglican church had the power to license and/or forbid all printing in the country, these men knew that they must speak out, but they didn’t necessarily want to die for it. After all, when a “trouble-maker” is discovered and dealt with (i.e. ruined by those in power that he critiques), then the criticism is silenced and people remain in the dark about the issues.
Read the rest here.
Anonymous blogging does permit the less powerful to constructively express themselves about the powerful. It does honorably trace its heritage to the anonymous pamphleteers, like those who wrote during the American revolutionary era.
Through anonymity authors may escape intimidation and other retaliation that would silence them and as was the case in 2007 with a New Jersey blogger, "daTruthSquad", legal action is sometimes required to preserve their anonymity and thus their continued self-expression.
Demeaning anonymous self-expression as "cowardice" is in such cases merely additional pressure on the blogger to fall silent.
As gwfrink3 wrote at the time:
Democratic government cannot be well-conducted in the dark, and this anonymous author is casting good light.
Yet anonymity is sometimes required if one is to both make responsible contributions to public discourse, and also put bread on the family table.
Do we not protect the discourse itself by protecting this one blogger?
Frink recently argued the public service case for FBC Jax Watchdog .
Aware that like all examples (ourselves included) he is imperfect, we have defended him as well. Anonymity and all, the less powerful critic's risk is real. Care is required.
We back up today on all of this not a single step.
Anonymous blogs can if well-handled hold an institution accountable, somewhat the way a good newspaper does, by getting facts out.
On Dec. 8, 2008, we held FBC Jax Watchdog up as an example of how it's done. Not done perfectly. But done well.
Today, we checked back by, and they still appear to be doing the report, document and comment process we found earlier.
Looking at church bylaw changes, what they found is, just stated plain, startling. For example:
In the previous by-laws, there was no distinction between how discipline was to be carried out by different positions in the church - that is there were just "members" - and all "members" are to bring about reconciliation in accordance with Matthew 5:23-24 and 18:15-16. Any "member" who is accused of wrongdoing worthy of discipline would be investigated by the Deacons. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that all "members" are equal in this case - whether it be senior pastor, associate pastor, secretary, or layman - all must seek scripture reconciliation followed by Deacon investigation and report to the church. All persons including the pastor could be investigated and subjected to church discipline by the deacons.
Not so any more.
In the new bylaws, there are two distinct processes defined for church discipline: one for the pastor and other clergy, and one for everybody else. If a member has a grievance against the pastor he/she must seek reconciliation through Matthew 18, and still if no resolution is reached, and the church agrees, mediation with the Florida Baptist Convention will be used. Sounds reasonable, but the end result is this: the pastor is not accountable to any lay body for misdeeds he may commit! Its the offended party seeking reconciliation, and then arbitration with an outside body IF the church approves it.
Drop by and read that post all the way through if you have time. Indeed, read the series. If you've ever served as a deacon or an elder, anywhere, it isn't difficult reading.
BTW: Is that typical of big Baptist churches are run these days?
Apparently determined to show the world of religious blogging that mainstream newspapers are irrelevant, the Florida Times-Union published a Sunday story which dwells heavily on a single, anonymously penned blog whose name and URL it haughtily refuses to publish.
We agree with Frink about the right of the author of FBC Jax Watchdog to anonymity.
Church governance and its abuses are our concern.
First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Fla., is a church whose executive pastor for education, Jim Smyrl, has declared the Catholic Church to be a cult and has abjured anyone who voted for a pro-abortion candidate to repent.
The blog mentions those two issues and raises a variety of other significant issues which, if false, are easily rebutted. Indeed, charges should be rebutted and corrected if and when errors are made. Accountability should, in our view, run both ways.
The blog's charges are often documented with audio recordings, copies of deeds and the like, very much the way a good online news article should be documented. Although the tone is far too strident to be confused with mainstream, professional, American journalism.
The third largest of the 43,000 churches in the Southern Baptist Convention is its principal concern - ample reason for an aggressive, frequently updated blog.
This blog and its peers will be of growing importance as more traditional publications continue their decline in resources and number.
Noncommercial blogs like FBC Jax Watchdog are sometimes our nation's best, current substitutes for (rapidly disappearing) aggressive, local, weekly newspapers, the best of which in their time held community institutions accountable to the communities they served.
Posts
All Comments
|
| Enter your email address |
| Visit this group |
