Karl Krist - Letter to the Democrat > Rexroad.com

Karl Krist has an interesting letter to the editor in the Daily Democrat today. I have not yet been able to figure out where I am on his main point on anonymous blogging.

Generally, I think that those that blog anonymously are nothing more than an electronic version of Sound Off. Even though we all know exactly who Martin, Judy, Leslie, and others are -- they still choose to try and hide behind the anonymous nature of their blogs. Why not just sign your name?

Several people have approached me about placing various pieces of opposition research regarding local candidates on the web. Basically creating websites with "stuff" that is anonymously placed there. I have never done that sort of thing before and am inclined to continue that policy. It just seems weak to me.

Clearly everything on this blog is my responsibility. I accept that.

I guess I still have an issue with being able to create a blog in ten minutes and then having it get widely circulated by the newspaper or other media outlets.

Have I commented anonymously before? Yes. I have and regret it. After I thought about it I determined that it not something that I will do again. If I have something to say... I am going to sign my name. This will cause me to take some heat but I can live with that.

Comments

By DMGreenwald @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 11:31 AM

I remain a big fan of anonymous blogging and posting--that is one reason why on my blog I allow people to post anonymously. Although I would prefer if people posted under an assumed name than simply anonymously, it helps create an online community.

One of the powerful aspects of the internet is the ideal of ideas that are divorced from physical realities. We can judge arguments on the basis of those arguments rather than on the basis of who is saying those arguments. And that gives people a chance to lower their defenses, whereas if someone you don't like proposes something, you are more likely to reject it outright. There is also a legitimate fear factor of people of expressing ideas with their name.

So I think there remains a powerful case for anonymity to be made.

By The Realist @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 12:05 PM

Here is the main reason I support anonymous posting.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the First Amendment right to speak anonymously: "author is generally free to decide whether or not to disclose his or her true identity. The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be...the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry. Accordingly, an author's decision to remain anonymous, like other decisions concerning omissions or additions to the content of a publication, is an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment." (McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm)

By Jim @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:53 PM

I guess I don't understand what you are saying in this paragraph of your post: "I guess I still have an issue with being able to create a blog in ten minutes and then having it get widely circulated by the newspaper or other media outlets."
It appears as though you don't like blog postings published in newspapers, but bloggers take material from newspapers all the time and post it or comment on it. What's the difference with newspapers using material from bloggers?
jim smith/editor/daily democrat

By Matt Rexroad @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:05 PM

I don't have any problem at all with newspapers taking information from blogs. In fact, I think it is great. It is helping promote blogging.

My concern is that tilt-up organizations can be formed with the sole intention of attacking someone or something but their obvious motive remains hidden.

If I form an anti-Dave Flory website (tempting) but call is Woodlanders for common sense should this get broad circulation? What if you knew I was a candidate preparing to run against him for school board? What if I had a court case pending against him regarding a necklace repair from 20 years ago.

At least when people sign their names you can consider the source of the information. In a small community we are likely to pay attention to who is saying what and why.

By cirenio1 @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:05 PM

Anonymous blogging allows racists, homophobics, and hate mongers to express their venom without taking responsiblity. In a democracy and open society, individuals should be accountable and responsible for their opinions.

By The Realist @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:40 PM

How do you really feel? lol

By Jim @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:44 PM

So, we have two different standards: Professional and personal. MSM need to be professional. When we publish we can get sued for slander and libel. But when a blogger goes on a tear he's afforded protection based on free speech? Such double standards won't be tolerated very long. Sooner or later the courts are going to weigh in with stricter interpretations of who can say what on blog sites. I suspect that within the next several years those who host blog sites will be held legally responsible for their own comments as well as the comments posted by readers, the same as newspapers are held accountable for letters to the editor.
jim smith/editor/daily democrat

By The Realist @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 4:02 PM

http://www.eff.org/bloggers/

This site dives into all of the lega issues facing Bloggers. You can be held responsible for libel comments. The hosting web page is not liable and probably never will be.

By DMGreenwald @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 4:16 PM

I understand the point that Jim is making and I also understand the point of cirenio. Towards that end, I would suggest that if anonymity can hide racism it also exposes it to because someone who espouses racist viewpoints will not be taken seriously except by a fringe of society.

As a blogger myself who has been both psuedononymous and well-known, the fundamental question is the credibility of the writing. If your point is credible people will give it the attention it deserves. If the point is not credible then people will ignore.

Toward that end, if Matt Rexroad decided to have an anti-Flory blog and he were running against Flory, the strength of that blog would be the overall plausibility and believability of the message. But the ideas and the concepts and the research would need to stand up on their own in order to be credible. At least from where I stand.

Anonymous people post all the time on my blog and sometimes the message is believable and taken seriously and other times it is ignored or ridiculed. Some people complain about it, but really the opinions themselves are what carries the weight, not who is uttering them, at least imo.

By Charlie in Japan @ Wednesday, March 28, 2007 7:44 PM

Ya know…. in many ways I agree with ‘cirenio1’. In our nation and society we have liberty and freedom. But we don't have the freedom to be irreresponsible when our actions hurt or maim others. I like the way Matt has done it here...He allows use to use a nick-name or ‘handle’. Yet the fact that Matt knows whom we all are allows for a measure of responsible conduct. We have freedom of speech in our Nation...But we don't have the right to 'scream fire' in a public place, doing harm to others, when there is no fire! Therefore, I oppose complete anonymity blogging. By all means….. Speak your views, that helps keep our democracy strong and viable…but be accountable to others in order not to maim or slander (without being reponsible..or able to be held responsible)....(as always, in my humble opinion) Charlie-san

By yolovoter @ Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:24 AM

"Anonymous blogging allows racists, homophobics, and hate mongers to express their venom without taking responsiblity." CRodriguez

And that's exactly the way it should be. Do you think I'm responsible to you for what I say, CRodriguez? I'll tell you right now, i'm not. Nor am I responible to the police, the federal governement, or anybody else (except maybe Matt, because it's his website). It's not illegal to express racism, homophobia, and hate mongering. As a matter of fact, I think people expressing such views serve an important purpose in society.

I don't think it's any more noble or dignified to post under a real name than an assumed one, although it may be facile to claim such. People have a variety of reasons for choosing not to remain anonymous....personal pride, to intimidate of others, to grandstand, etc. And as Justice Stevens pointed out above, anonymous bloggers have similar (and, usually, more compelling) reasons not to use their real name.

By cirenio1 @ Thursday, March 29, 2007 9:54 AM

Individuals that use our freedoms to express hateful language should have the courage to identify themselves, otherwise they are abusing such freedoms. People should stand up for what they believe and not hide their ifentity. If they have the audacity to expres such opinions, they should have the courage to stand by them.

By DMGreenwald @ Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:22 PM

Perhaps ideally they should, but why does it matter? Does it give their ideas more credibility to remain anonymous? No. Does it give them more influence? No. So why does it matter? The marketplace of ideas and free exchange will work those things out.

By YoloCalVet @ Thursday, March 29, 2007 2:47 PM

Cirenio1,

Carlos Mencia would have a "field day" with you! Ah, " The Mind of Mencia"..... aterrible thing to waste.

YoloCalVet

By sportsmom @ Friday, March 30, 2007 8:24 AM

In regards to anonymity in ANY type of correspondence, web or otherwise... if you have an issue with something someone does, you are within your rights to voice your opinion and feelings. I don't have a problem with that. I'm a big girl and can take your criticism. However, it has been my experience that, typically, if you are voicing your opinion or feelings anonymously, you are doing so because you are so filled with hate or so full of self righteousness that you're basically spouting off and not really solving a problem or expressing yourself in a manner that is constructive. In addition, these anonymous diatribes often are hurtful and not based on fact. This can lead to outside sources not knowing or understanding the true issue. People can be injured, and not physically. Livelihoods can be at stake and if you take it upon yourself to point out the "wrongs" or the "unprofessionalism" of an individual anonymously without fact you become the cog in the wheel that turns around the life of someone in a manner that can cause great harm not only to the person in question but also to the family that they may be responsible for feeding.

OK... off the soapbox. Basically, think before you blog. Or write. Be responsible and realize that the action you are taking can effect more than the personyou have the issue with.
And I'm not afraid to sign this...

Jennifer Young

You must be logged in to post a comment. You can login here