Rosemary Port’s actions exude hypocrisy. Port is the up-until-now-anonymous blogger who wrote five posts in August 2008 on a website called Skanks in NYC. In the posts, she labelled Canadian model Liskula Cohen a ?skank? and a ?ho.?
Dictionary.com lists three results for the word skank. I think It’s a safe bet that Port wasn’t referring to a ?rhythmic dance performed to reggae? music. More likely It’s definition number three: ?one who is disgustingly foul or filthy and often considered sexually promiscuous.? Likewise I guess she meant “ho” as slang for a prostitute and not one of the 17 other possible definitions.
So how did this become page two news in the August 25 National Post? It seems that in January Cohen sued Google (who provided the blogger service) after they refused to hand over the identity of the blogger. In mid-August, a New York Supreme Court judge forced Google to provide the email address of the blogger. This is when Rosemary Port, a 29-year-old fashion student, was identified to Cohen. They knew each through ?friends and parties on the New York fashion scene.?
Ms. Port and her attorney now intend to sue Google for 15 million dollars because they didn’t protect her identity. She was quoted as saying, ?When I was being defended by attorneys for Google, I thought my right to privacy was being protected . . . Without any warning, I was put on a silver platter for the press to attack me.?
Now stop the train. I’m no lawyer. I’ve never written a blog and have read perhaps four in my life. I’m not up on the blogger’s code of ethics, rights and responsibilities, protection, or anything else. I don’t know about stuff like that but I think this stinks.
How can Port expect to defame someone under the cloak of anonymity and then be all righteous and indignant when the judicial system yanks the cover off her? She said, ?I feel proud to live in a country where You’re not persecuted for your opinions. That right has to be protected.?
In my humble opinion, the issue is not the right to hold an opinion about Cohen or anyone or anything else. I think the issue is doing it in a defamatory way without having the moral fibre to own up to your opinion. It’s cowardly and unfair to attack someone and expect to keep your identity a secret. That’s why newspapers don’t print anonymous letters to the editor. The world is not short of critics or hateful attacks on all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons. Ms. Port, if You’re so sure of yourself and the correctness of your opinion, then have the courage to take credit for it; don’t hide behind the anonymity of a blog.
Ms. Port goes on to say ?I feel my right to privacy has been violated.? Well, duh. Who started this game? What about Ms. Cohen’s right to privacy and protection from ridicule and defamation by an unknown attacker? As far as I’m concerned your 15 minutes of fame are over, from where I sit.
