« Blogging | Home | Patriot Act under fire »

Swift Boat Veterans for the MPAA?

By Jay Savage | June 15, 2005

It’s official, the political spammers have found me. It was only a matter of time, I suppose.

In the last two days I’ve received comments to two of my previous posts [[1](http://www.engatiki.org/2005/05/20/32) [2](http://www.engatiki.org/2005/05/26/41)] from “readers” identifying themselves as “jake@yahoo.com” and “geist@yahoo.com” (no relation to [Michael](http://www.michaelgeist.ca), I presume) telling me that [Jorge Cortell](http://jorge.cortell.net/) has been completely discredited among Spanish bloggers and pointng me to the same [article](http://www.acam.es/noticias_detalle.php?id=858) from a Spanish recording industry group with the details.

There are a couple of interesting things about this.

1) jake and geist both seem to share the same cable connection from a Canadian ISP at [24.43.132.119](http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=24.43.132.119), leading one to believe that they might in fact be the same person, and,

2) [Spanish bloggers](http://www.error500.net/universidad_brantidge_jorge_cortell) and [on-line press](http://www.noticiasdot.com/publicaciones/2005/0505/2305/noticias/noticias_230505-14.htm) don’t seem to see it [quite that way](http://www.proyectoisla.com/mangasverdes/?p=845).

Man, I love the smell of troll in the morning.

My Spanish is a little rusty, but the root of the issue seems to be some inconsistencies in Cortell’s C.V. Specifically, his published C.V. says he went to Kellog College, rather than Kellogg Community College, although it does list the degree recieved as A.Sc., which is a pretty clear indication to any North American reader, at least. It also appears that at least one of his degrees came from a correspondence “diploma mill”.

There’s something dishonest at work here, no doubt. But the lies don’t seem to have been particularly heinous, and Jorge has provided the [original documents](http://homepage.mac.com/jorgecortell/blogwavestudio/LH20041021170027/LHA20050529142818/index.html) that show what really happened. I can’t approve of C.V. padding, but the inconsistencies aren’t really as bad as some people are making them out be, and padding is an unfortunately common practice in academics–as no doubt everywhere else.

Even so, if people wanted to call him a lying, cheating, disgrase on the whole profession, I wouldn’t complain nearly as loudly as I’m about to. This particular smear campaing really ticks me off, and here’s why:

None of the articles attacking Jorge have claimed that the incident never happened. None. They’ve claimed that he isn’t exactly who he said he was, and most importantly that he wasn’t a professor.

Pardon me while I pause for my rage to subside.

*pause*

*pause*

Fist of all, he never claimed to be a professor, he claimed to be an instructor, and he seems to have the pay stubs to prove it. He was reported in the press as a “professor,” and corrected commentors from the beginning.

Second, who the [”French” expunged] cares? As an occasional teaching fellow/adjunct/what have you myself, I bristle as the suggestion that all members of the university community, from presidents right on down to incoming Freshmen aren’t entitled to have their academic freedoms protected. And that range includes adjuncts and lecturers, thank you very much. The idea that someone’s academic rank should have any bearing on whether that person is allowed to speak about a topic is absurd. I don’t care if it turns out he was the [explative deleted] janitor, the administration shouldn’t have cancelled a lecture because someone didn’t like it. Academic freedom is just that: freedom. And we’re not talking about breaking into the chem lab in the middle of the night to teach people how to make crystal meth, here. We’re talking about a giving a publically announced lecture on a common technology at the invitation of the student union.

I’m not defending Jorge’s actions, here, or defending him as a person. But nothing he did or didn’t do affects the validity of the accusations acainst the recording industry, or mitigates the shameful behavior of the UPV administration. The fact is that the university succumbed to pressure from the industry, and it was willing to sacrifice its integrity to keep its friends. That fact remains inexcusable, whatever the circumstances.

[[link](http://www.engatiki.org/2005/05/20/32) to my original post on the subject.]

Share This

Topics: drm, free speech |

Comments