3 ms·

What dumbass thinks email is off the record?! Hey Steve, this email chain is off the record on my side.

mikeryan 16y ago
"off the record" has a fairly specific meaning(s) in journalism, none of which mean "never to be seen or read by anyone"
Elepsis 16y ago
When you exchange mail with journalists (yeah, yeah, have the argument about whether Gizmodo staff are journalists elsewhere) it's fairly common for them to clarify when they will not plan to directly quote a reply you send to them in a story.
- maukdaddy 16y ago
  If you want something off the record with journalists you CALL THEM. E-mail is never, EVER, off the record.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    My phone can record every conversation that goes through it. I suspect any modern phone can do that.
    - qq66 16y ago
      But recordings of those calls are not always legal, and when they are legal to create, they are not always legal to use in court. There are much stricter laws around phone recordings than emails (because laws take half a century to change, and email's only been in wide use for 25)
      - tokenadult 16y ago
        My state follows the federal rule that EITHER party to a telephone conversation may record the entire conversation. What is admissible in court as evidence may not be as broad (in a particular case) as what evidence can be gathered by either party, but as I just mentioned in a comment I posted elsewhere in this thread, a conversation like that between Lam and Jobs can blow up in Lam's face even if the only evidence offered is courtroom testimony by Jobs regarding what Lam spoke, from Jobs's recollection of the conversation.
bbatsell 16y ago
"Off the record" is meant strictly in a journalistic sense there (ignoring questions of whether Gizmodo constitutes journalism). He's saying that any response Jobs gives cannot be quoted or referenced by Gizmodo in an article. He doesn't mean "this e-mail will self-destruct in 60 seconds."

"off the record" has a fairly specific meaning(s) in journalism, none of which mean "never to be seen or read by anyone"

Elepsis 16y ago

When you exchange mail with journalists (yeah, yeah, have the argument about whether Gizmodo staff are journalists elsewhere) it's fairly common for them to clarify when they will not plan to directly quote a reply you send to them in a story.

maukdaddy 16y ago
If you want something off the record with journalists you CALL THEM. E-mail is never, EVER, off the record.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  My phone can record every conversation that goes through it. I suspect any modern phone can do that.
  - qq66 16y ago
    But recordings of those calls are not always legal, and when they are legal to create, they are not always legal to use in court. There are much stricter laws around phone recordings than emails (because laws take half a century to change, and email's only been in wide use for 25)
    - tokenadult 16y ago
      My state follows the federal rule that EITHER party to a telephone conversation may record the entire conversation. What is admissible in court as evidence may not be as broad (in a particular case) as what evidence can be gathered by either party, but as I just mentioned in a comment I posted elsewhere in this thread, a conversation like that between Lam and Jobs can blow up in Lam's face even if the only evidence offered is courtroom testimony by Jobs regarding what Lam spoke, from Jobs's recollection of the conversation.

bbatsell 16y ago

"Off the record" is meant strictly in a journalistic sense there (ignoring questions of whether Gizmodo constitutes journalism). He's saying that any response Jobs gives cannot be quoted or referenced by Gizmodo in an article. He doesn't mean "this e-mail will self-destruct in 60 seconds."