I think you've caused a flurry of name changes and information deletions. I am sorry to hear that such a useful tool as BOL has been misused. When I was first designated Compliance Officer, I was untrained and overwhelmed. BOL was my primary education, and I am the first to sign its praises and have recommended it to many.

An interesting thing that just occurred to me is that when I joined BOL almost 2 years ago, there were several conversations about the fact that if you weren't willing to stand behind what you said by posting your name, then perhaps what you had to say didn't carry as much value. Now, here we are removing names and information in order to protect ourselves.

I guess there is always a price to pay for progress.

Wowee! Am I glad I moved from Purgatory to Limbo.

My only problem is now I have to re-learn who all these new names belong to!!

I wonder if there is a way we can have a bio exchange so we know about each other while protecting bank names and our names for those with a concern. Perhaps via the site or an email exchange? I don't have a solution, just throwing out an idea.

I have been posting since the inception but did not have a Username. Recently I picked a name but nothing indentifying to me or my bank. I have always had this concern which I shouldn't but do.

BC,
I seethe when I read about rogue journalists using their pen to their advantage. My thought will probably be requesting you to lower your standards to that of the journalist we are speaking of & BOL may have its reasons to not permit my request to live, but here it is anyway.

I'm dying to know who the journalist is & who he or she works for. Is there really a valid reason for us not to know? I don't like the idea of this black sheep within journalism being able to run and hide from us. Not that it would affect me, but many of you would probably not cooperate with him or her in the future if you knew they were involved in this shenanigans. Is there a better way for this person to reap the rewards for their behavior? (I am assuming they have not acknowledged their error or apologized.)

I have and always will remain anonymous!

Did the journalist really do something unethical? If a statement by a person is posted in a public place, which this is, is it unethical to quote that person on the subject in the media? Why are we to think that this forum, which is open to the public, is off limits to journalists looking for quotes, opinions or information? The journalist probably just called as a courtesy to ask for permission to quote the BOLer.

Does a journalist have to get George Bush's, Natalie Maines', Peyton Manning's, Alan Greenspan's, General Tommy Franks', your next door neighbor's permission to use a quote? I don't think so...(and I don't think it is because most of the folks I named are public figures). If you state something in a public forum, I do not believe there is a journalistic rule of ethics that requires the journalist to get permission to quote the source.

My question: Was it an ethical violation by the journalist or merely our niavete in dealing with the media that has us disconcerted over the BOL quote?

I don't pretend to know the answers, but I think it is important to look at both sides of the issue.

Well, Z, you have a point, but the problem is that the journalist in question was told no, and then proceeded to quote BC anyhow. That's irresponsible, in my view. If you are going to use the quote regardless, then don't even ask. Just use it. At least then you may be able to use the excuse that "Hey, it was a public forum". Still, like I said, you have a point. When I first joined this forum, I recieved a PM from Michele Petry that welcomed me to the forum. Perhaps new members could be informed of the public nature of this forum through that PM (assuming that it is a stock PM, can be changed, and is sent automatically).

In a general sense, I believe it would be both a technical and ethical violation for a journalist quote from something someone supposedly said on a website somewhere without source verification and validation. While source verification is the ethical and professional responsibility of any credible journalist, permission to use a public statement is not. By calling BC, the journalist may not have been asking for BC’s permission, but only trying to positively verify the identity BC.

-George

That may be true, but my comments were based on BC's earlier post where it was stated that the journalist called and asked for permission. I can only assume that what BC says happened is true, that is why I said what I did.

Apparently, his conversation with BC confirmed that it was BC who indeed made the BOL comment. With that information in hand, it is not an ethical violation to print the quote with or without permission of BC or BC's bank CEO. Asking for permission to print it was probably just his/her way of verifying that BC said it. For the future, if you are asked about anything you said on BOL, just say "no comment." Better yet, join the legions of anonymous registered posters.

But send me a private message so I can recognize the players. I feel so lost without a score card.

To add a further question-
Did the article somehow imply that BC's statement was a statement made on behalf of the bank? And if so, was this contrary to any disclaimers in the post or clarification by BC or the CEO that BC's statements did not represent the bank's position?

It may be "ethical", but that doesn't mean that it was responsible or right. I'm not trying to argue with you, Z, things like this just frost me. Like you said, the best thing to say is "no comment".

It certainly would be unethical to say that BC was speaking for the bank. I am still not convinced that the journalist did anything wrong or irresponsible. He found a statement in a public forum. (He has as much of a right to be there as anyone.) He confirmed that BC was the author of the statement by calling him. He did not need permission at that point to quote BC. Think about what our country would be like if journalists had to get permission everytime they printed something. The former Soviet Union comes to mind...or Iraq...or ______________(fill in the blank with your favorite socialist, despot, tyrant, dictator, etc.).

What I am getting at is like it or not, if you put something out there for public consumption it is not necessarily slimy or unethical or wrong for someone to quote you.

I think that we all feel a little used by what happened to BC, but then again, we like to think of ourselves as living in this little insular BOL world. We don't. Others ARE watching us. And it is their right to watch and to quote you or me. (Of course, without proper verification, it would be sloppy, slimy, and unreliable journalism.)

Your comments have been interesting and thought provoking! Now that I have calmed down a bit, I can tell you that I contacted the editor of this magazine, who was very apologetic and embarassed. He also offered to send me a letter of apology.
The journalist in question did contact me and had noted in his file that I had refused to allow the quote. However, he also noted that permission was given by someone in our PR department, which was, according to her, untrue. Nevertheless, this journalist is well known and highly regarded by Mary Beth, Andy and Richard, to name a few, who have all expressed their astonishment that he would do such a thing. I can only surmise that there must have been some kind of misunderstanding or miscommunication between him and my PR person - and because I really would prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt , I want to leave it at that.
I hope you all can appreciate why I prefer not to name names - I don't think damaging this person's reputation out of an incident that was partly due to my big mouth and partly due to a possible misunderstanding is the right thing to do.
So, no harm, no foul. I'm still employed - in fact I was recently promoted to AVP and the bank didn't demote me,so I guess all is well. Use this as a life lesson, and , as they used to say on Hill Street Blues - "Be careful out there!"

Well, I am glad. Z's right, though, I'd much rather live in this world than one with an "Information Minister" (by the way, there are no Banker's Threads, they are a figment of your imagination. If you suggest otherwise you will be hit with shoes).

Yes, it was the Iraqi Information Minister who wrote Bear Collector's article. I would not make much of it. He now has a new occupation as the focus of ridicule for a new web site Iraqi Information Minister

(I fixed the link to the Iraqi Information Minister)

I am glad for your continuing dialogue. I seethe no more and I can go home in peace. BC--I agree with your decision not to share the name.

(At least & until the next incident.)

Hmmm... I'm contemplating one of those coffee mugs that says "We are in Control." Might come in handy for the next exam.... or whenever DUH finalizes the RESPA revisions.

It's late, can you tell?"

Love your new pic, Z! Is it really you or are you
undercover?

Maria,
You do not see a new picture. In fact, Zaibatsu is not within 100 miles of BOL.

You guys have gotten me so scared that I have changed my name. Just so you will know, I am not a new poster but an old friend and fellow banker. You just will not know which one.

See you in the funny papers!

I decided to use my actual photo because you Americans have come to know and trust me as the Iraqi Information Minister. I may change my name to the BOL Information Minister. Or just BIM for short!