Anonymity
: The Preacher is wrestling with the question of anonymity. I’ll just say this: Whether in a blog or in a comment, I have much more respect for the person who has the guts to use his or her name.
22 responses to “Anonymity”
-
I agree with you, Jeff. However I can’t blame someone for staying anonymous. Sticking one’s head above the parapet is dangerous work.
-
Yeah!
-
From the Supreme Court
Justice Steven’s opinion for the Court note that arguments favoring
the ratification of the Constitution advanced in the Federalist Papers
were published under fictitious names. Justice Stevens said “quite
apart from any threat of persecution, an advocate may believe her
ideas will be more persuasive if her readers are unaware of her
identity. Anonymity thereby provides a way for a writer who may be
personally unpopular to ensure that readers will not prejudge her
message simply because they do not like its proponent.” Stevens
concluded “Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a
pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of
advocacy and of dissent. Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of
the majority. ”
From the EFF:
“Anonymous speech is part of a vaunted American tradition that goes back to the Founders, who often published unsigned political pamphlets,” said Megan Gray, Senior Counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
…
“Anonymous speech on the Internet lets people make criticisms that are difficult to state openly, and share information and support about topics that might be stigmatizing, such as addiction or sexual abuse,” said Ann Beeson, Staff Counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union. “Unless online anonymity is protected, whistleblowers who want to criticize their employers, parents who want to criticize the principal of their children’s school – and many others – may be afraid to speak out. That would be a loss for our country.” Beeson pointed out that the Supreme Court has repeatedly found that anonymous speech is a right protected by the First Amendment.
”
From about.com:
”
Anonymity is a wonderful thing. Early American patriots like John Jay, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison routinely published under pseudonyms – such as drafting the Federalist papers under the name ‘Publius’. Ben Franklin and others had long been publishing not only political diatribes but also editorials and comments about issues of the day (like the role of women in society) under fictitious names – and even fictitious genders. Anonymity can help frame important issues apart from the author of the article, and can permit the author to feel free to express controversial ideas or reveal sensitive information in the public interest without fear of retribution.
”Anyway, I tend to have much more respect to folks that are honest, respectful of others, know how to apologize for their gaffes, and refrain from snark for the sake of snark and bash for the sake of bash.
-
Well, I’m gutless then. In my defense, however, I witnessed the whole moxie vs moxie thing. It got out of hand and someone lost their job. I carry my laptop to and from work and let everyone in my office use it so we can read and comment on blogs. The downside is we are stuck with dial up and the upside is we feel safer. I don’t really feel that anonymous as I always sign the same way and do use my email for whatever that’s worth.
-
I don’t like to use my full name on the internet. My mother has instilled me with a firm belief that everyone out there is an axe murderer.
-
I have not used my real name on the internet ever before. Michael is just much too common of a name.
Luckily, my last name is Latvian in origin….but I’m not telling you what it is.
So there. -
Great, so your full name can show up in Google? So I can get more spam? Uh, no.
-
It’s easier to say if you don’t fear any repercussions from work. Many do.
-
If I use my real name (cough-lukas-cough) online, it’s easy to Google me up. No problem, but then you run into the horrifying Mom-Reads-Blog Onion story. Or worse, professional-acquaintance or colleague-reads-Blog.
See, bitching about bosses: bad. Bitching about those in inferior positions to you (i.e. students)? Worse.
And what is blogging about, if not bitching about one’s students? :) Moreover, what is grad school writ large about.. if not bitching about one’s students? -
I hold a similar view with regards to letters to the editor, because they are not verifiable and they’re asking me to print it. But anonymity on the Internet is more of a necessity, and not as necessarily bad for the one reading it. Several of the writers above have mentioned very good reasons for that. As well, we aren’t all “Jeff Jarvis” with a name and a need to have it fed. Some of us like to keep it that way.
-
Thank you for saying this Jeff. It’s apparently very politically incorrect to say it anywhere on the internet and it needed to be said.
“anne.elk”: The mind simply boggles. This: Anyway, I tend to have much more respect to folks that are honest, respectful of others, know how to apologize for their gaffes, and refrain from snark for the sake of snark and bash for the sake of bash. does not describe the way you comport yourself on the internet whatsoever and I say this from extensive personal experience in many different contexts. I must conclude that you don’t have much self-respect, if this is what you do respect. -
I prefer to remain anonymous to disassociate myself from my rather inane comments.
Years ago my mother ran into some problems in the chat rooms…some pretty creepy people out there. Given that mapquest will identify where I live and google where I work, why take on the exposure. -
Wow! Google knows where everybody works and Mapquest has a feature where you can look up someone’s location based only on their name? Who knew.
-
>I have much more respect for the person who has the guts to use his or her name.
There is nothing wrong with someone using a nym as long as they stick to using just one nym. The cowards are the ones that will make up a new name in order to say something they don’t want associated with them. -
I think that consistancy is more important. There is no “phelps” in my name, but I have been using that since 1995. I am Phelps on the internet. The easiest way for me to hide my opinions would be to sign my government name to it.
-
I have personal safety reasons for not using my full name on my blog or comments, though I will happily disclose the information to people I can trust not to put it out on the web, and generally use it in email exchanges with readers and other bloggers. Sometimes it’s more complicated than just not wanting to get spammed or Google cached. I do use my real first name and first initial, but any more than that and I’m opening myself up to a world of hassle and potentially harm.
-
NAME- aintsayincuzidontwant2getjacked
-
As an anon poster my reasons are that i am a newspaper editor and say some very partisan things on my blog.
I don’t want to jeapordize my professionalism by having people read all this. I don’t want to deal with it. i don’t want them to have to deal with it.
Others have more concerns about privavy and Eric Dreamer is a dreamer (unless he was bieng sarcastic) when he thinks Google can’t track down where you work etc etc.
People who use there names on their blog, yet still try and not give where they work etc etc are doommed in the attempt.
Real names are indeed better. But people who have established a nom de pixel and stick with it usually have good reasons for staying anon. -
The Preacher wouldn’t lose his job if he dropped the mask.
He is, however, a real preacher, and for those of you that usually spend Sunday morning lolling in bed with the newspapers, it should be pointed out that he has a congregation of real people to serve and protect. That’s harder to do if all your sermon illustrations suddenly go global. -
stoddart gets it. It’s not just about RLP and his spam, it’s about his family and his congregation. If his life and important relationships – not to mention ability to write freely – are going to change radically from outing himself, he shouldn’t do it.
-
I used to have the same feeling as Mr. Drezner about the anonymous commenter. That is until I read the comments above and quickly realized that there would be considerably less activity on the Internet if folks couldn’t feel free to make even controversial statements without fear of recrimination.
The obvious pseudonyms are pretty easy to identify, but who is to know that my name really is that which I sign off with, especially when an accompanying email address is not required. Of course regular contributors could easily be recognized by their writing styles; so they are correct in using a regular and consistent pseudonym.
Since I don’t have a job to protect, a public presence to uphold, and am too old to be intimidated anymore, I can afford the luxury of using my given name on any blog thread or public statement.
I respect the reasons why others cannot feel as secure as I do, and accept their right to use anonymous identification; as long as it is for honest self-protection reasons and not as a shield to hide behind after making scurrilous attacks on other people or any other comments that don’t meet the test for honesty. -
I have to make a correction to my last comment.
In the first line, I make an attribution to Mr. Drezner. The correct name should have been Mr. Jeff Jarvis.
Sorry to all concerned.
