Ethical? Interactive map of gun permit holders

What's the down side for the food editor?

Anyone who wanted to find his address could have. They just published public information, and they didn't use a FOI request to get it.

 

What did the firearm license holder do wrong that justifies having his/her personal information published?

 

So, it can't be wrong in both cases?

Sorry, but that's bullshit. The real issue is the gun rights folks wanting to punish as many people as possible for what the Journal News did, even if it includes people who had nothing to do with it.

 

OK, question: What if the paper had taken the information and presented it differently, leaving out names and addresses? Would that have been acceptable?

What I'm thinking here is, as a way to show how widespread or not ownership in the area is, they put together a heat map that shows where ownership is most concentrated but doesn't show exactly who has the guns? Would that have been a better approach?

 

So, they punished them by publishing their public records on some obscure blog?

What will they ever do next?

Stupid, but also inconsequential.

 

Let's just say I question the motives of those defending that action such as yourself, especially given your stance on gun rights.

 

I'm still shocked anyone is really shocked an author of a blog made a dick move.

 

The fact it was a blog had nothing to do with it. The paper made the move first, pretending it had news value and some importance. It did not. All it did was publish the names of people had not broken any law. Might as well have published a list and said "Here are your neighbors who SMOKE!" Or "OWN RED CARS!"

Bullshit move by the paper. Without that, nothing else happens. Find real news -- like who's carrying illegally -- and it means something.

For those criticizing the blog, would you feel differently had it been a blog publishing the information of the gun owners and then the newspaper publishing the blog creator's information?

 

“@Poynter: Newspaper that published gun owners' names/addresses will screen mail after receiving suspicious powder: http://t.co/25BF8c0n”

 

What's the big deal about publishing the info? Why should reporters expect more privacy than the public?

 

The original list was of handgun permit holders. Not "gun owners."

Remarkable how often that's been wrongly stated.

 

How is that the "real issue"? That issue didn't even arise until after the paper had published the list of gun permit holders - common citizens, just like their staffers.