In theory, anonymous blogging is not an honourable or healthy endeavour.There is a very organic check in place when you have your name on your blog, a photo and/or a link to your Facebook page. Knowing that who you are in your waking, working life can always be associated with what you write online certainly helps to prevent a blogger straying from considered, reasoned, respectful debate.
I'm not going to name any names but whether your ideas are civilised or you spout the views of a battle puppy I think most anonymous blogs would benefit from a lifting of the veil. (Incidentally, I heard that a certain old lady's blog is being administered by a parliamentary researcher to help shore up the grey vote? An example of a rumour that can be nipped in the bud with a brief profile page.)
But that's the theory, that's my head in the clouds principled stance and like so much in life (Scott Rennie anyone?) it comes an absolute cropper when it is challenged by a real life incident.
The outing of 'NightJack' by The Times was an absolute disgrace, a serious error of judgement from a newspaper (and a judge) that should have known better unless the action is part of a larger more concerted plan. Richard Horton's own take on the matter is a poignantly delightful and inspiring read.
In what way was the public interest served by the unmasking of this man? This family man who had already closed down his blog by the time the story had broke?
The steamrollering of Daniel Finkelstein in the comments section is a perverse joy to see after the consistently excellent writer tried to defend his employers with a rather odd excuse of 'What if it had been Sir Ian Blair writing the blog?'. Well, it wasn't, so what's your point Dan?
No, although I'd personally like to see anonymous bloggers cast off the bow lines and face the world with their heads held high, it is a decision for individuals alone to make and at the end of the day blogging should be about content rather than personality.
So I will happily join in Guido Fawkes' call to end the anonymity of The Times' editorial.
9 comments:
I disagree. Anonymity gives you the freedom to say what you like, without recourse. Sure, that means I have the opportunity to say a lot of shit, but it also gives me the freedom to tell the truth without affecting my daily life.
If I were a blogger in parliament, and I was leaking information or whistle-blowing, I would certainly not want to compromise my position in parliament, while at the same time, if something is in the public interest to be widely known, it should be published.
If anonymity leads to more gossip and leaks then i'm all for it! It's interesting though that you see no recourse as generally a good thing and i see it as a negative. It just makes me wonder, if people aren't willing to say something against their own name then in most instances they should give serious thought to saying it at all. (Very much in favour of anonymous comments, of course)
I write my blog and comment on blogs I'm interested in, but prefer the happy medium of an alias. My colleagues and friends know who I am, some even do me the honour of actually reading my blog and discussing it with me.
Previously I commented anonymously, but felt that hindered developing any sort of relationship with those whose blogs interested me. Now people are able to read my own warped efforts, if they feel the need, and get a picture of where I'm coming from on a particular subject.
I never read the 'NightJack' blog, although I'd heard about it. As far as I'm concerned, the Times were utterly wrong to publish the author's name. Finkelstein's piss poor efforts at justification show him for what he is. If the true nature of his 'outing' of Nightjack was to clarify whether the guy was a detective or not, then surely the story could have just been exactly that.
"Yes, the author of NightJack is a detective. We've confirmed it, but he's asked us to maintain his anonymity. Here's some of his thoughts since closing down the blog..." (no different from 'an unnamed Police source... blah!)
Totally agree Jeff there are all sorts of reasons why bloggers post as they do. You for example didn't always publish your full name but your fellow bloggers even those of us who knew who you were would never disclose it, the same by in large with many others.
Bloggers do not out fellow bloggers.
However, the tired old media don't get it. Even though many of their columnists are aliases so that anybody can write and take over a comment column for example. It is just the same thing. Think how long it took us to find out the identity of Deep Throat from Watergate. The press have lost all sense of responsibility when it comes to reporting.
SNP win Inverclyde South West by-election. Jump in 1st preferences from 3rd to 1st
http://www.inverclyde.gov.uk/GeneralR.aspx?id=1284
I'm in two minds about it myself, Jeff. In health, a lot of information about stuff wouldn't have come out, if it wasn't for anonymous bloggers. And whistleblowers get a really hard time of it from the NHS. Look at Margaret Haywood who blew the whistle on elderly neglect and was struck off the nursing register on a technicality. That's what professionals face if they come out. I dislike ad hominem bloggers who make personal attacks on people, but I think they generally come out in the watch; blogs like that aren't very attractive anyway. The Red Flag didn't last long..
Or even the wash..:)
i dont know
people know my reasons for being annoynmous that is i dont want to get myself or my boss into trouble and i dont want to have to watch waht i say.
having said that, many annoynmous blogger such as myself guido and tory bear (not that im as good as them) have relaxed the annonymity. not having a big advert for yourself, just posting links that reveal who you are.
with politics, i think many want blogs unmasked as they think it might be someone important.
and im really not!
We've been here before Jeff and I think it should be the choice of bloggers as to whether they stay anonymous or not.
I'm not particularly anonymous, many, within and outwith the SNP know who I am, including my MP and MSP, but I prefer to keep my political blogging completely separate from my business life.
I am comfortable with the balance I have found. Obviously if certain people don't like it then they don't read it.
Post a Comment