This Sunday and Monday, October 15-16, residents of SL (and people around the world in RL) will get the chance to help set the first Guinness World Record for the greatest number of individuals to stand up in support of the eight Millennium Development Goals of the United Nation’s Millennium Campaign to help fight extreme poverty worldwide.

Aimee Weber of Aimee Weber Studios is the brains behind the SL effort and explains more here (you can also listen to a SecondCast interview with Aimee here):

"To be counted in this historic endeavor, all you have to do is locate a ‘Stand Up’ kiosk and obtain a free wrist band. There are nearly a hundred Kiosks around the grid already, including in the central plaza of Midnight City. On October 15-16, click on the wrist band to assume the ’stand up’ pose and register yourself as a supporter of the Millennium Development Goals. Your participation will be recorded and included in the final count for the Guinness World Record. Our contribution will make a thunderous statement to policymakers everywhere."

It’ll take just a few minutes of your time to make history. Wow.

William gave examples of how serial dramas are able to significantly raise awareness about family planning options, HIV prevention, arranged marriages (in reality abductions and violations of young girls) and exploitative child labor and child slavery. He also showed where this awareness resulted in changed behavior. For example, he told one moving story where the family of a 14-year old abducted girl was reluctant to let their other daughter attend school for fear that she too would be attacked on the way to class. However, after hearing a serial radio drama discussing "arranged marriages," they and the other villagers decided that they would band together to prevent further abductions. 

Esta explained that the success of serial dramas, one of several types of entertainment-education vehicles (others include telenovelas, series, sit coms and docu dramas), lies in the identification of the audience with the characters, and in helping audience members believe that if a character can improve his or her life, perhaps they can too. Esta also provided an overview of the steps involved in using serial dramas to bring about change: Audience, analysis, access, articulation, artistry, auxiliaries, advocacy, advertising, assessment, and adjustment.

Katie Paine, who writes KDPaine’s PR Measurement Blog and will be presenting at the conference this afternoon, also enjoyed the session.

Admittedly I’ve been writing quite a bit about legal-related issues lately. Not because they’re always the most scintillating, but because they’re darn important. (Maybe we could even talk about some of them them during one of the monthly Communicator Meetups Kami Huyse is organizing in Second Life — and if Kami promises to be as entertaining as last time, it’d definitely be fun.)

It’s my view that we as communications professionals need to know, at a minimum, the very basics in order to help prevent our clients from hanging themselves. Lawyers should obviously be consulted as needed — although unfortunately, as Tom Biro points out, even they don’t always seem to get it right.

So here’s another development on the legal front, one that perhaps isn’t usually anticipated when an individual or a company starts blogging: blog contents being examined as part of of the jury selection process in order to reduce the potentially adverse affects on a trial and to avoid rogue jurors. Especially for PR professionals active in corporate affairs, reputation management, crisis communication etc., this is something to keep in mind.

The proliferation of blogs and other similar tools raises another interesting question. To what degree would commenting on a blog be regarded as impermissible contact between counsel and opposing party, or between counsel and juror? Certainly lawyers know that they cannot reveal certain information about an active case (and there are rules governing what can be said about past cases as well), but what would prevent a juror from finding an attorney’s blog and leaving comments there? My guess is that jury instructions don’t yet universally address that.

And to what degree would someone’s online statements or prior interaction between an attorney and a potential juror impact the voire dire process, such as dismissing an individual via peremptory challenge or for cause? This isn’t mere conjecture. Take a look at this recent online exchange: Although it’s unlikely that these two individuals will meet in a court of law, Richmond, Virginia prosecutor Tom McKenna has stated that he’d "definitely be striking him [Chicago-based  Mark Draughn] off any of my jury panels."

Things to think about.

(Photo from tizzie)

"Blogs are like virtual pubs."

It doesn’t matter whether you’re in consumer products PR, high-tech marketing, politics, or something else, it’s always about connecting with your audience.

Blogs are like virtual pubs… gotta love it.

Case in point is an ABA eReport article that discusses a New York State proposal that would designate legal blogs as advertising, thus subjecting them to state scrutiny and regulation:

"The storm was set off by a proposal that ‘computer-accessed communications’ such as blogs be included in New York’s definition of legal advertising, and therefore require state scrutiny. The proposal, by a committee created by the state’s Administrative Board of Courts, also suggests the state code of professional responsibility extend court jurisdiction to out-of-state legal advertising that appears in New York….

And if blog posts must be approved, what’s the point? ‘This seems to be another in a series of recent regulatory efforts by state bar regulators that seem woefully out of touch with the Internet era,’ wrote Dennis Kennedy, a St. Louis lawyer who posts at Between Lawyers." [Read Kennedy's post If Lawyers Can Advertise in New York, They Can Advertise Anywhere...But They Probably Can't.]

Equally bothersome, however, is when individuals expose themselves to legal liability by doing something that appears to be intentionally stupid. I’m referring to examples provided in the USA Today article Courts are asked to crack down on bloggers, websites (via Chris Heuer), such as posting false STD information about someone on Don’tDateHimGirl.com or setting up a fake MySpace.com page that contains obscene content. Not very smart — and that’s an understatement.

Josh Hallet, who is hosting Friday’s BlogOrlando conference, emailed the session leaders a reminder that our role isn’t to spoon feed the audience with information, but to lead and facilitate the discussion. Phew, that makes it a lot more interesting!

And since the Legal Issues session is scheduled for right after lunch, I hope no one’ll be in a food coma when they come back   Why? Well, because this session gives us an opportunity to cover some important areas, such as whether bloggers are considered journalists and if so, what legal protections they may have; libel & slander (and the role of satire); how to protect against liability regarding blog comments left by other people, and so on. And if we have time, we can also talk about what conflict management approaches, short of using cease and desist letters or initiating other legal action, may be open to bloggers.

In other words, this session will hopefully provide basic information that ultimately will help us avoid some mine fields and allow us to focus on what we really enjoy doing — communicating and interacting with our readers and others in the community. 

Here’s a brief list of some helpful sites to know about:

• Electronic Frontier Foundation
• Chilling Effects Clearinghouse
• Media Bloggers Association
• The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
• The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School
• Stanford Law School for Internet and Society

And these lists of blogs, compiled by 3L Epiphany, are also good information sources and commentary to keep on hand:

• Media Law blogs
• Internet Law blogs
• General Intellectual Property Law blogs
• Technology and the Law blogs

I recently started bookmarking legal-related information pertinent to blogs, podcasts and vlogging on del.icio.us. While the list definitely isn’t comprehensive, maybe you’ll find something of interest to you, so feel free to have a look.   

See you Friday!

The exhibits offer insight into one of the most important legal cases of modern history, and their emotional impact can’t be overestimated (the exhibits include actual 9/11 video footage and recorded calls, a collection of photos of the victims, as well as graphic photos of bodies found inside the Pentagon after Flight 77 crashed into it).   

As explained in the overview, the exhibits are organized first by the party seeking their admission (Prosecution Trial Exhibits are available here and Defense Trial Exhibits are available here), second by the phase of the trial in which they were introduced (Phase One concerned Moussaoui’s eligibility for the death penalty, and Phase Two concerned whether he would be sentenced to death or to life in prison without the possibility of release), and third, by exhibit number.

(Photo of Prosecution Exhibit No. FO08301 available here.)

Defamation (from Law.com Dictionary):

n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander.

Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.

Libel (from Law.com Dictionary):

1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.

Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation.

It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie.

Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue….

Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit…. Minor errors in reporting are not libel… 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement.

Slander (from Law.com Dictionary): 

n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.

Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit.

Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove….

Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

Harassment (from Law.com Dictionary):

n. the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The purposes may vary, including racial prejudice, personal malice, an attempt to force someone to quit a job or grant sexual favors, apply illegal pressure to collect a bill or merely gain sadistic pleasure from making someone anxious or fearful.

So audio is HUGE. It’s everywhere, and how one sounds is growing more and more important nowadays (although, yes, in a competition between the two, it’ll never trump how one looks).

So why is it that way too many women sound like Bambi (yeah, I know Bambi was a guy, but I’m using the term as Urban Dictionary’s definition #2 does)? We’re not talking about the women whose, um, particular line of work ( video or otherwise) actively encourages that. We’re talking about women who, probably unintentionally and unknowingly, sound flighty, sound like they took a swig or two of helium, or sound like they’re going to burst out in a fit of giggles any second.

Yeah, and unfortunately some of these girls and women are online personalities.

It’s not a matter of having a high pitch (having heard my own recorded voice, its definitely higher than I’d thought). You’re either born with that or you’re not — although vocal training can go a long way in helping out. No, it’s a question of modulation: pitch, tone and volume.

And while it doesn’t really matter what one sounds like when talking with friends or in non-networking social settings — in which case, Bambi away, which everyone’s probably done on occasion — when speaking in a professional capacity such as on the phone with clients, in presentations, at meetings, or while pitching journalists, it definitely matters.

Want an example of someone with a pleasing and still decidedly feminine voice? Check out Donna Papacosta who hosts the Trafcom News Podcast.

(Image of Microphonie from Gudmundsson)

According to the WTVF report, "McDonald’s says it has a policy against hiring sex offenders at its 8,000 or so company owned stores. But at the 18,000 franchise stores that operate under the golden arches, they’re free to hire anyone they want."

WTVF’s investigation revealed nine sex offenders in Delaware, thirteen in Indiana and sixteen in Louisiana working in McDonald’s restaurants. But, unfortunately:

"We can’t tell you how many other child molesters or other sex offenders are working at McDonald’s restaurants here in Tennessee or anywhere else. That’s because in most states, including Tennessee, sex offender registries don’t have information about employers. So the public can’t find out — until something bad happens."

No response yet on McDonald’s Corporate site.

(Photo sources: Happy Ronald McDonald here and sad Ronald McDonald here.)