Friday, April 27, 2007
One of the upsides of blogging on substantive issues is the immediate engagement between theory and events. One of the downsides is that the speed by which the blogger can engage means that the vetting in the more traditional venues does not occur. But, of course, one of the upsides, as institutionalized, say, in Wikipedia, is that the connection is transparent, and subject to readers' immediate scrutiny.
An insightful reader took issue with my characterization of speech act theory in connection with the Apple, Inc. backdating issues, and I agree it was imprecise. I've updated the post below. More on the relationship between speech act theory and deception, if you are interested, in Peter Meijes Tiersma, "The Language of Perjury: 'Literal Truth,' Ambiguity, and the False Statement Requirement," 63 S. Cal. L. Rev. 373 (1990).