శ్రీక్రిష్ణ జన్మస్థానానికి వెళ్లడమంత సులభం కాదు.
దానికీ కళాపోసనుండాలి. చానా శ్రమపడాలా.
గోడలు దూకాలా, తలుపులు బద్దలుకొట్టాలా,
పీకలు నరకాలా. ఇంకా చానా చానా చేయాలి
కనీసం అవినీతి చేసి జైలుకెళ్లాలన్నా.. బుర్రకు పనే
కాబట్టి జైలుకెళ్లడం అందరూ అనుకునేంత ఈజీ మాత్రంకాదు.
కానీ..
చెమటోడ్చకుండా. సిన్న రక్తం చుక్క సిందించకుండా
గాంధీ మార్గంలో అహింసాయుతంగా
మీ ఇంట్లోని కంప్యూటర్ ముందు నుంచి సరాసరి
జైలుకెళ్లే మార్గం కూడా ఉందండోయ్
ఇందులో మీకు నొప్పి ఉండదు.
బుర్రకూ పని చెప్పక్కర్లేదు
చేయాల్సిందలా... ఇది చదవడమే
Earlier this month the BBC alleged on a news program that a former
Tory politician was a child molester. The report, which didn’t actually
name the man, was untrue.
But a frenzy of speculation began on Twitter, with thousands of
people either tweeting or retweeting the name of Alistair McAlpine —
a.k.a. Lord McAlpine, an adviser to Margaret Thatcher when she was prime
minister. The BBC has since apologized for sloppy reporting and coughed
up £185,000 ($294,000) in damages. But some of those who tweeted about
it are facing a probable lawsuit.
Those who repeated the claim include everyone from ordinary tweeters
with few followers to high-profile celebrities like British actor Alan
Davies with hundreds of thousands of followers. The media is reporting
that some 10,000 people could be sued, leading to the
largest number of defendants in a case in British legal history.
Of course many of those people were merely doing what most people do
on Twitter: passing along gossip, the way they would on Facebook, by
text message or by email. But unlike those, Twitter is completely
public.
“Twitter is not just a closed coffee shop among friends,”
says
Andrew Reid, McAlpine’s lawyer. “It goes out to hundreds of thousands
of people and you must take responsibility for it. It is not a place
where you can gossip and say things with impunity, and we are about to
demonstrate that.”
There’s a good chance he’s right, say other libel lawyers. The case
has precedence. Earlier this year, Chris Cairns, a professional
cricketer, went on trial for match fixing. He was cleared. Cairns turned
around and sued for libel a former Indian Premier League chairman,
Lalit Modi, who had tweeted about Cairns’ alleged involvement in
match-fixing. A judge in London ruled against Modi and
awarded Cairns £90,000.
Libel lawyers say the same rules apply in the McAlpine case, and it
won’t matter if tweets outright accused McAlpine of child molestation or
passed along the BBC report like party gossip.
“All tweeters are equally liable,” says Cairn’s lawyer, Rhory
Roberton of Collyer Bristow. “Tweeters who don’t think about what they
are doing are vulnerable by nature. Some would say stupid.” More than
two dozen people who tweeted the news have reportedly come forward,
apologized, and
paid a nominal fee to go to charity. But others may not get off so easily.
Over the past year, a number of lawsuits have suggested that Twitter
is fair game as a public forum in the eyes of lawyers and judges. One
case gained
attention perhaps because it sought $1 million in damages for a single tweet and a posting on a not particularly popular blog.
It involved an Oregon woman who blogged and tweeted allegations about
a plastic surgeon’s sexual conduct. The doctor had been disciplined in
the past for “intimate physical contact” and for suggesting it could
serve as pay for treatment, but his public reprimand made no mention of
sex. The case was later dropped by the doctor,
reported the
Oregonian.
Often cases have involved high-profile types who really ought to know
better (or at least should be better advised). The musician Courtney
Love has been sued at least twice,
once by her own former lawyers, over vitriol spewed via Twitter. An NBA
referee sued
the Associated Press for defamation resulting from a tweet sent by a
sports writer suggesting he’d made a bad call to make up for an earlier
bad call.
The libel case involving Love and her former lawyers is still
ongoing, but the other suits were ultimately dropped or settled. The
executive director at the
Media Law Resource Center
says that as far as the center is aware, no other libel case about
something published on Twitter has made it into a US courtroom.
In the UK, at least one Twitter-related case has led to a conviction,
though for threats, not libel: In 2010, a man posted a tweet saying he
would blow up a South Yorkshire airport if it didn’t reopen soon.
He later said it was a joke: He wanted to see a girl (whom he had met
via Twitter) and couldn’t fly out because of a snow closure. The judge
didn’t see it that way and fined him
roughly £1,000
including costs. The ruling was, however, overturned this past summer,
when judges ruled that the tweet wasn’t menacing after all.
But as Twitter becomes more widely used, not just by ordinary people
but also by media organizations, such cases are bound to proliferate.
Indeed, Twitter exposes traditional media to a kind of risk they’ve
never encountered before: The internet can take something that wasn’t a
libel and turn it into one.
In the BBC case, McAlpine was not named on
Newsnight. The
provable defamation happened only when people started guessing at his
identity and tweeting his name. Says libel lawyer Robertson, “Had no one
tweeted, the BBC would have had an argument that McAlpine was not
identified, and thus his claim in libel against them would fail.”
సంగారెడ్డి, నవంబర్ 25 (ఆంధ్రజ్యోతి) : టీఆర్ఎస్‌తో పొత్తు పెట్టుకోకపోతే
గత ఎన్నికల్లో తామే గెలిచేవారమని తెలుగుదేశం పార్టీ అధినేత చంద్రబాబు
అన్నారు. తాను చెప్పిన విషయాలపై ఆలోచించి,వాస్తవమని నమ్మితే తనకు
సహకరించాలని ప్రజలను కోరారు. "తెలుగుదేశం అధికారంలోకి వస్తే ఇంటికి
పెద్దకొడుకులా మీ జీవితాల్లో ఆనందం నింపుతా''నని చంద్రబాబు హామీ ఇచ్చారు.
మెదక్ జిల్లాలో ఎనిమిదో రోజైన ఆదివారం ఆయన మనూర్ నుంచి నారాయణఖేడ్ వరకు 9
కిలోమీటర్లు నడిచారు.
