30 March, 2007

Do we want a code for blogs?

Some people want one and some don’t. So, nothing new when it comes to standards and codes of conduct, some people like them, some don’t.

I’m writing this post in direct response to a post written by Damien Mulley, columnist for the Sunday Tribune in Ireland. Damien is well respected within the Irish blogsphere and is responsible for creating the Irish blog awards. Ok, so it’s a small country with a few people when compared to the countries that most of our readers live in, but his view (and those who commentate on his blog) is undoubtedly valuable to this debate.

Damien entitled his post Blogger code of conduct? Two words – F*ck off. Note that I replaced the u.

So, I think we can gather from Damien’s post that he doesn’t like the idea of a code for blogs. However, I’m hoping this view is tainted by a misconception so we can have an informed debate, rather than slamming the door on his way out of the room. I also feel that many of the commentators on his blog now have a tainted view based on his own opinion, which I believe, is misinformed.

Damien wrote

When I see companies starting up codes of conduct I think ISO certification, I think of these astroturfing “plan english” campaigns which charge organisations A LOT to write better documents. What happened to Kathy Sierra was horrible but this hysteria does nobody any good and it is sickening to see business people pitch their products at such a moment.

I don’t wish to make any assumptions as Damien hasn’t named any companies. However, I’ll state Segala’s position for the record.

I came up with the idea for a code of conduct (as I’m sure many others did) for blogs a couple of years ago. This was mainly because I saw the potential for mainstream commentators to pretend to be someone they’re not, with the aim of positively or negatively commenting on brands that they either owned, or were in competition with. In doing this, they could have a huge impact on consumer opinion and therefore make an impact on a company’s bottom line. In fact, a PR company was caught doing this recently.

Damien went onto say

Follow netiquette, follow good manners, be civil, or don’t. I really hope that something like this doesn’t spawn some elitist bully-boy standards or code body that does nothing more than charge an admin fee and bully people into signing up. That’s what unions are for. Freedom of speech should not be cut back on because of a few assholes. Why on earth do we need to impose guidelines on ourselves online when we don’t need to offline? A blogging community won’t tolerate people like those that attacked Kathy and will de-link from them and will just shun them and then don’t need a checklist to do so.

Unless Damien is referring to a specific code that I haven’t seen, I think he’s blowing this whole idea way out of proportion. I agree with everything he says about bully-boy standards etc. However, who said that someone, or more importantly, some government was going to impose anything on anyone. I don’t believe for a second a code for blogs could possibly become an ISO standard, nor would I like it to be. I just happen to be a qualified ISO auditor so I have the experience (and qualification) to know that it’s not applicable, relevant, warranted or wanted. Perish the thought even!

What I (Segala) intend to do is facilitate debate, formalise codes and then endorse/promote them through ContentLabel.org. It’s not for us to say what is appropriate or inappropriate in a particular country or for a particular culture; it’s about enabling more relevance and reliability on the Web using technology and new content classification standards.

I’m not trying to police the Internet, or suggest someone should. In fact, I hate the idea of companies such as DoCoMo restricting access to the Web.

The vast majority of blogs on the Web are not likely to follow a code, or even know that one exists. Most blogs are personal ramblings of individuals who like to share their thoughts online. There is however, a small percentage of bloggers who may consider themselves professional bloggers, online journalists, or just journalists (or something else?). Of these bloggers, some of them may wish to promote themselves as professionals of some description, as a differentiator from the long tail of blogs.

I wonder if Damien’s fear of a code was due to Sam Sethi’s reference to my brainchild, in his post about an unfortunate incident which involved Kathy Sierra receiving death threats from other well known bloggers.

Sam wrote

I too am going to do two things.
1. Turn off anonymous comments
2. Work with Paul Walsh to help bring out a bloggers code of conduct which he and I have spoken about for sometime, using content labels.

Please note that I didn’t write a post in response to Kathy’s unfortunate situation to promote the use Content Labels. I didn’t remain silent on purpose either; I just didn’t see the need to talk about a (potential) code just yet. I actually wanted to put some very rough guidelines together before putting something on ContentLabel.org.

It’s very unfortunate that Sam’s post could be perceived as him and I discussing a code due to Kathy’s situation. This is not the case.

So, some people will like the idea, such as Tom Raftery, Dennis Howlett, Jemima Kiss (journalist and blogger for the Guardian) amongst others and as I said earlier, some won’t.

So, my response is simple, if you’re a blogger and you don’t like the code, don’t adhere to it. If you like to read blogs and don’t care for a code of conduct, then this conversation is almost irrelevant. Perhaps more than one code is needed for different requirements, who knows?! The conversation hasn’t really started until now.

So, please feel free to keep an eye on http://contentlabel.org where the code will be created, debated, ratified, formalised, endorsed and promoted by industry.


41 Responses to “Do we want a code for blogs?”

  1. Ian Delaney 30 March 2007 at 7:25 am #

    Just to try to understand how this works, Paul. On contentlabel.org, you talk about people being able to specify whether or not they see sites in search results that don’t meet accessibility standards, and also about preventing youngsters from seeing sites containing porn. So a blogger’s code label might conceivably be used to give advanced indication that a link is from a non-adherent or even block such links, depending on the user’s choice? So by-and-large, it will be to people’s advantage to join the club because there won’t be any barriers to people visiting? Membership could potentially be written in to the TOS of blog hosts?

    On a blog code, the contents might potentially include ‘does not include threatening language’, ‘is not anonymous’, and ‘is not discriminatory towards a particular social group’?

    If that’s the case, I’m still anxious about this – I can see cases where each of these might be justifiable. A senior civil servant’s anonymous blog, for example, who hates toffs and tells Tony Blair to go f**k himself sounds like a potentially good read to me.

    I’m sure you followed the storm that followed Tim Toulmin of the PCC’s alleged suggestion of a blog code of conduct back in November. People weren’t happy.


    I’m sure there’s various ways I may have misinterpreted this, so really, this is just to seek clarification rather than judge.

  2. Pat Phelan 30 March 2007 at 7:59 am #

    Gotta say I am with Damien on this one Paul. If you come to my house and you not nice well I wont be inviting you back. Certainly a group of obsessed geeks who pick on me aren’t going to worry me in the least.

  3. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 8:29 am #

    Ian – I’m not entirely sure what it’ll cover to be perfectly honest. Having said that, I’m pretty certain it won’t cover the stuff that concerns you because that kinda of code is already covered by ICRA – http://www.fosi.org/icra/#vocab

    The code will cover whatever the blogshere would like it to cover.

    It’s NOT about restricting what people say, or how they say it.

  4. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 8:35 am #

    Pat – I think you’ve missed the point because a proposed code wouldn’t have anything to do with anything that Damien talked about. That’s not to say he or you will change your mind. It does mean that your decision to disagree isn’t based on fact, it’s based on a misconception (at present) :)

    It’s NOT about restricting what people say, or how they say it. For example, it shouldn’t affect 20 major any more than it would a priest.

  5. Tom Raftery 30 March 2007 at 8:37 am #


    I realise why you had to comment on this but I don’t think a balanced discussion on a code of conduct for bloggers can take place at the same time as a discussion about death threats against a blogger.

    I also believe that the language used here is very important. A Code of Conduct sounds very like a top down, command and control, set of laws which will be rigidly enforced. 12 points on your licence and you are off the blogosphere for 12 months!

    I think a Charter of Best Practices for Blogs is far more likely to gain acceptance than a Code of Practice.

    Poor intentional pun coming…
    I realise that this is just semantics but, as communicators we need to be very aware of the nuances of language.

  6. Ian Delaney 30 March 2007 at 8:38 am #

    So maybe more about behaving in a ‘journalistic’ way? (Though if you knew some of the journalists I know…)

    Understand the freedom of speech thing – it’s about people having choice over what they *read* rather than what is said.

  7. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 8:42 am #

    Tom – I totally agree with your first point, as I said, I only commented because Damien took the wrong end of the stick.

    I think your point regarding the wording is great. Perhaps code of conduct isn’t right for this subject!

  8. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 8:48 am #

    Ian – yes, yes yes… :)

    It’s about what people, like you, want to see in best practice guidelines, not what I think. As I’ve said, some people will like it and some won’t. If you don’t like it, don’t use it.

    I’m simply creating a foundation upon which industry can create new codes of conduct and best practices that help enable more trust on the Web – that is, providing users with more choice in search results.

    I certainly wouldn’t see guidelines for blogs anywhere near as structured/regulated as say, accessibility which is a legal requirement in some countries.

  9. Niall 30 March 2007 at 9:15 am #

    There is actually a document, or rather a RFC, on Netiquette Guidelines available since 1995. Most of it is just plain common sense, but as a teacher of mine used to like to say, common sense isn’t all that common anymore.

  10. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 9:27 am #

    Niall – thanks. Will check this out on Monday if that’s ok – will be offline soon.

  11. Kamrul 30 March 2007 at 11:05 am #

    Before arguing on whether codes of conduct for the blogosphere should be implemented or not, there is few terms we have to clearly identify.

    [1] Freedom of speech- Where it’s boundary ends?
    [2] Difference between laws/rules and code of conduct/ethics.

    Codes of conduct/ethics are just a simple set of guidelines for us responsible people to follow, to keep ourselves in order. Most of which are common sense. It’s about keeping civil people together and picking the odd ones out. If everyone used common sense and exercised discretion, we wouldn’t have come to this argument, right?

  12. Paul Browne 30 March 2007 at 11:40 am #

    Whether you agree with a ‘code of conduct’ or not , how would it be enforced? If you’re insensitive enough to make threats, I doubt if a ‘please abide by a code of conduct’ is going to stop you …


  13. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 3:55 pm #

    Paul – that’s a question that requires a post in its own right! In short, I think every standard, best practice and code of conduct has a use case for self-declaration and independently verified. Why don’t you check out our Firefox extension that demonstrates how sites that follow a code can be found in search results. It includes screen shots. http://segala.com/searchthresher_wp/how-it-works/

  14. Damien Mulley 30 March 2007 at 4:34 pm #

    I only commented because Damien took the wrong end of the stick.

    Please outline how you came to this conclusion.

  15. Paul Walsh 30 March 2007 at 4:48 pm #

    Damien – I was emphasising the fact that I only commentated on this subject at this time because you brought it up and spoke of it very negatively. I thought you could have explored the possibility of a positive side.

    By ‘wrong end of the stick’ I mean you blew it all out of proportion from Sam Sethi’s comment. I’m not aware of another blog that talked about a code for blogs very recently. Please correct me if I’m wrong and you picked this up from another source – you didn’t provide any links in your post.

    You talked about ISO which is way off track, this provided a great platform for other commentators to jump in with (not surprisingly) negative comments.

    I think the group signed up to participate would benefit from your involvement. I’d be delighted if you’d consider contributing – even if you continue to disagree with the need to do anything in this space.

  16. Damien Mulley 30 March 2007 at 5:52 pm #

    Paul, do realise I don’t read your blog and didn’t read Sam’s mention of your idea on this either. I had instead been given advanced word of what some stateside people were saying offline via some journalists who rang me up on the matter. Seems Mr. O’Reilly was the first to make mention of this idea to the media. The idea has been around for a long time though.

    I’m sure Alanis Morrisette could be commissioned to write another verse of her woeful song on your inaccurate assumptions.

  17. Chang Woo 30 March 2007 at 6:32 pm #

    This is getting funny. You talked about freedom, yet you don’t publish comments you don’t like :P so here it goes again.

    Last time you Press guys said

    “If you want to see how the newspaper industry would look like if it was unchecked, then look at the internet”

    In another situation WSJ assistant editor Joseph Rago said blogger’s are fool, since they don’t have any code of conduct.

    Why does it always have to be my way or highway!

    “if they threaten you, ring the police and let them handle it.”- What they will do? Launch an inter-continental investigation? Wake up! Not every blogger is Press guy, that they can call hotline.

  18. Paul Browne 30 March 2007 at 6:55 pm #

    Paul W.

    Nice plug for the product :-)

    I’m still not sure how the ‘code’ would work / would be enforced. What happens if I *don’t* have the plugin? Can I still comment (in which case what use is the code?) , or am I blocked (in which case a large %age of your audience is inadvertantly stopped from innocently commenting).

    Paul B.

  19. Kamrul 30 March 2007 at 6:56 pm #

    Off course no one will give you threat, if he/she lives across the ocean. :P

    About that WSJ case, yes it is true Rojo did called blogger’s fool.

    But the point is you have to understand Blogosphere is a lot different than Press. In press highly educated professionals conduct business, who knows where to draw the line.

    On the other hand in Blogosphere you will see 10 year old kid as well as 70 year old granny. So as you can see it’s a jungle of different opinions.

    The purpose of code of conducts is to build a standard, so that mainstream media won’t say over and over “we are lawless”. well certainly you can disagree “after all we are talking about freedom”. Your disagreement certainly doesn’t mean you are wrong.

  20. EWI 31 March 2007 at 8:38 pm #

    Damien is well respected within the Irish blogsphere

    Really? Not in this corner.

    In fact, a PR company was caught doing this recently.

    And here we come to one reason why. I’ve banged on about Mulley’s involvement of Microsoft with his Blog Awards at length before; I see now that he has the very PR firm responsible for several blog-related scandals of this nature (Edelman) as a sponsor for the 2007 ones(!).

  21. Paul Walsh 31 March 2007 at 8:52 pm #

    Paul – you definitely have this wrong. Our Firefox extension is a non-commercial extension to demonstrate how mainstream browsers and search engines should read more data about sites in order to provide more reliable and relevant search results. So, my ‘plug’ isn’t a commercial one, but for industry.

    Anyone can suggest feature updates to the extension – we’ll start updating it in a few weeks.

    Furthermore, the extension (which is more of a project than a product) was announced a few weeks ago as one of 4 applications that will be formally endorsed by the W3C to help demonstrate real implementations of the Semantic Web! I haven’t blogged about it yet.

    So, the way in which the extension works has nothing to do with how codes of conduct etc. will be adhered to.

  22. Paul Walsh 31 March 2007 at 9:01 pm #

    Damien – I assumed you read Sam’s blog, not this one.

    Some of the commentators on your blog also assumed you were referring to the stuff I’ve been talking about.

    FYI – the Guardian featured a story about Segala which covered a code for blogs.

  23. Paul Walsh 31 March 2007 at 9:03 pm #

    Chang – we don’t moderate comments, nor do we delete them. Either the spam detector picked your previous comment up, or something weird happened.

    The BBC news article to which you refer, isn’t connected to Segala in any way.

  24. Chang Woo 1 April 2007 at 3:18 am #

    Sorry P.W for the confusion, I was referring Mainstream media/Press view towards blogosphere through BBC article. Unfortunately that wasn’t the only article suggested that, blogosphere is lawless/lack of standards.

    The moderation allegation was against Mr. Damien not Segala.

    Kamrul, Blogging is just no longer a hobby, it’s a profession. So why just like any other profession it can’t have its own codes of ethics?

  25. Ian Delaney 1 April 2007 at 9:14 am #

    Tim O’Reilly has now published his idea of a code of conduct, and interestingly, it actually centres around blog comments rather than blog content:


    (Short version – blog owners should delete abusive comments)

  26. Paul Browne 1 April 2007 at 2:57 pm #

    Paul W,

    No worries , there’s nothing wrong with shameless self publicity!

    Even better the way that you’ve explained it. Does this make it one of the first ‘real’ applications for the semantic web ? :-)

    Paul B

  27. Paul Walsh 2 April 2007 at 9:12 am #

    Ian – thanks for the pointer, I’ll get in touch with Tim this week. I’m a little disappointed that we’re talking about a blog code in the same breath as Kathy’s situation. It’s not about abusive comments for me personally… in fact, I think you shouldn’t delete comments – unless of course, there is a very compelling argument to do otherwise.

    Paul B. – I agree totally. I just wanted to say that on this occasion I wasn’t self-promoting – at least not intentionally.

    In answer to your question, I personally think Content Labels is one of the first real applications that demonstrates the Semantic Web. Furthermore, everyone in the value chain benefits from them, especially end users.

  28. Kamrul 2 April 2007 at 6:56 pm #

    Your referred set of guidelines for Network Etiquette (Netiquette) is wonderful, which is mostly general common sense though.

    But things have changed a lot since 1995. A lot of those are obsolete now, on the other hand a lot more other etiquette needed now. For example suggested etiquette for one to many communication–

    Read both mailing lists and newsgroups for one to two months before you post anything. This helps you to get an understanding of the culture of the group.

    Is illogical in terms of blog, chat, forum :P . Well they didn’t have blog at that time. Anyway my point is today’s communications are many to many, i.e. public participations rather than limited to a group. So here both writer and commenter have to act responsibly.

    So we need something more than general etiquette guidelines, something specific sync with time and scenario.

  29. Niall 2 April 2007 at 7:32 pm #


    Would still consider a blog one to many, it’s still only one person making the post or comment. I agree that RFC1855 is a little behind the times, however the whole idea behind RFCs is that anyone can make a submission and have it peer reviewed.

    It seems a bit antiquated now, but it’s still a good system without which most of the protocols which everyone uses on a day-to-day basis wouldn’t exist. Prime examples being smtp and http!

  30. Kamrul 3 April 2007 at 9:54 am #

    Well Niall,
    I have to disagree that todays blog/wiki/social network is one to many. for example in blog the communication flow this way-

    Blogger(s)< ->commenter(s)< ->commenter(s)< ->Blogger(s)->non responsive observers

    Like this article was written by Paul, now you and me exchanging ideas. Both of we are acting as commenter, not blogger.

    Anyway i am not saying that RFC1855 isn’t good. I am saying we can consider that as a basis, but not the whole.

    I totally agree with your “make a submission and have it peer reviewed.” That is why we need participation building a set of guidelines/Codes of ethics which will reflect majority opinion, before putting it for peer review right? So the codes won’t preserve the interest of any entity or individuals, but the community itself.

  31. BBC in user-gen content shocker…

    You might think it’s just the users that produce user-generated content, but not so. The BBC has wobble-cam piece on YouTube about how it deal with submissions from users.

  32. [...] For the record, I don’t care or give a fig about “content labels” and all that other insufferable snakeoil shite. I am against a blogger code of conduct which some predatory scum are trying to force on a group in order to cash in on mass hysteria. Had the Guardian actually read my post properly, besides copying and pasting from Paul Walsh’s blog post, which egotistically assumed (without checking) I had been talking about his idea, they would have known that. I would have expected something better from BBC Print Lite. I would have also expected a link to what they falsey said I had written. It is easier to make false claims and not back it up, isn’t it though? [...]

  33. Bernie Goldbach 7 April 2007 at 6:45 am #

    Standards, codes of conduct and professional guidelines often collapse for lack of enforcement. This kind of shortcoming surfaces month after month in A-List PR podcasts from Shel Holtz, Terry Fallis, Neville Hobson, and Mitch Joel. I’ve watched content labeling for images fall over several times before and wonder how in the world you could make a viable mechanism for annotating blog content since the content of many blogs runs the gamut, rarely even categorised for easy harvesting by enterprise aggregators used by Irish politicians.

    Then there’s the ropey issue of content distorted by comments placed on blog posts that may be well-off the map of acceptable discourse.

    The most successful content labeling structure in mainstream user-generated media is run by Apple iTunes. But they have people who randomly check tracks and who respond to complaints on the back of a ping structure that conforms to their content management system. If that is to happen as a result of this current discussion, you’re talking about a commercial solution, paid subscription plans or some other funded mechanism. At first glance, this wouldn’t fit the normal editorial style of many casual bloggers.

  34. Kamrul 9 April 2007 at 2:20 pm #

    You show a creative common badge in your site, right? How do u think the browsers and commercial news harvester detect your site’s content is “some rights reserved”? Naturally the RDF code you copied from Creative commons site and put in your template/source file. (some people mistakenly remove the RDF code though)

    I am sure you know Creative Commons is 100% free service, yet very effective. As far as concern of enforcement, “The Commons”, group of volunteer who seek for violation or misuse. If found, existing law/codes used to handle that matter. But off course the violator loose the creative common license agreement.

    Same way me, you and everyone can develop a set of guidelines/codes of ethics. Those who accept, shows a RDF coded badge (for sure human & machine readable) and become a member of community.

    80% blogger show creative Commons for protecting their content, so why Content Label can’t be implemented to protect their moral-legal ethics/codes they follow?

  35. John McCormac 10 April 2007 at 12:15 am #

    The problem with the Semantic Web is that it is a great idea in theory but nobody really wants to put it into widespread use. It is a simplistic attempt to apply a Human model to information that only works on small scales. In many respects it is like the web directory ideas of the early 1990s. The web has moved on drastically since then. However the Semantic Web still has its true believers who frequently don’t understand the magnitude of the web. This is why Google wins while Doras.ie (Eircom’s failed web directory project) no longer exists.

    This code for bloggers suffers from similar problems. A blog is quite an unusual publication in that the blogger is the author and editor. It is an avenue of personal expression. Therefore applying a code to it is a restriction on personal expression.

    The big problem with content labels and blogger codes is that they remove the freedom of thought. They make the decision for the reader and interjects the morals and values of their creators between the reader and the author.

  36. [...] Do we want a code for blogs? – Segala Segala has been discussing a code of conduct for bloggers for a while now. I wonder where this will go. (tags: codeofconduct bloggers segala code conduct) [...]

  37. Paul Walsh 10 April 2007 at 8:47 am #

    John – the full potential of the Web won’t be reached until we have a Semantic Web. The Semantic Web doesn’t have to happen over night, nor do I think anyone advocating it, actually believes it will happen over night.

    I believe this is the opposite to what you’re saying. People like Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of the Web) appreciate the magnitude of the Web more than anyone. He always wanted a Semantic Web when he invented it in 1989; interoperable sites using the data that lies beneath the Web.

    I think the problem is lack of understand and a huge misconception surrounding ‘what’ the Semantic Web actually is, even amongst the most technical savvy. This is the reason we now have the W3C Semantic Web Education and Outreach Special (SWEO) Interest Group. David Rooks and I are proud members. The purpose of the group is to do what it says on the tin; educate and reach out to industry.

    The W3C now has 4 real applications to help demonstrate what the Semantic Web is – http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/ So, we’re trying to move away from the academic (only) approach in favour of demonstrating real user (and commercial/financial) benefit.


    Where’s your assumption coming from regarding a code for blogs restricting ‘expression’? It’s easy for people to use phrases such as ‘freedom of expression’ because nobody wants to hamper it.

    BTW, not all blogs are ‘personal’, some are company views. You see, everyone is assuming that every blogger is an individual working from their bedroom talking about music. Whilst the vast majority of the blogshere is made up of personal ramblings, there are a few who wish to be differentiated from the rest in some way. Why restrict them from doing so?

    It’s not as if a code or set of best practices would restrict the use of swear words, or vulgarity – this type of stuff is already covered by ICRA labels.

  38. Paul Walsh 10 April 2007 at 12:28 pm #

    John – … I’m not saying you’re not familiar with what the Semantic Web is. Just making the point that most people are misinformed.

  39. John McCormac 10 April 2007 at 3:33 pm #

    No problem Paul,
    It is just that I view the Semantic Web as an attempt to apply a Human information architecture to the chaos of the web. That viewpoint comes from actually working with searchengines, writing search engine spiders and mapping domain name usage for the last seven years or so. The web does not really have an information architecture and the present generation of search engines really spider everything and attempt to extract some meaning from the data. The Semantic Web would make things easier but I think that reality would hit it hard. It would be gamed as easily as Metadata and Google’s PR. The web is now a highly commercial arena – a far cry from the walled garden that it was in the early days. And unless there is an overwhelming commercial argument for the application of Semantic Web to the chaos of the web, then it simply will not happen. Until that time, people will rely on search engines to navigate the web.

    The restriction of freedom of expression comes directly from the consequences of the adoption of a code of conduct. Once you sign up to a code of conduct, you automatically start to restrict or censor your own posts. The majority of blogs, (that are not actually splogs), are personal blogs and they would be the ones signing up for such a code, or would at least be the target of such a code. Company and business blogs have a certain image to maintain and would be far less likely to need a code of conduct that covers such things as profanity.

  40. [...] These are really principles that have been repeated time and time again on blogs. There is nothing new here, just a matter of decency and respect. If there is going to be some sort of code to set guidelines for standards to aspire to then perhaps the whole initiative should be facilitated by a body with a more accommodating approach. Segala has also been working to develop a code of conduct for some time now and has established the framework for an alternative code on the Content Labels site. [...]

  41. [...] Paul Walch says ‘I’m not trying to police the Internet‘, and I believe him. But when codes like the one currently proposed emerge, they fill a vacuum in the control of internet speech, and are eagerly supported by individuals and governments who seek such control. [...]

Leave a Reply


Founded in 2003 and privately owned, Segala is a specialist in testing and certification.

Segala’s mission it to help make the Web more reliable, safe and trustworthy. Our method of certification helps us to realize this mission by exposing more information about the suitability of each website in search results – enabling users to make informed decisions about which sites to visit. Read More…


Contact us by emailing daphne@segala.com or call +353 (0)1 2931966. Our address is 19 The Mall, Beacon Court, Sandyford, D18. Ireland.