rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

On anonymous posting

As someone who attaches his name to his writing, I hold a certain amount of scorn for people who post under pseudonyms or anonymously to news sites.

I understand that there are occasions when some commenters have something valuable to add to a discussion and if they use real names they could face censure, discipline at work or social repercussions. But I presume that these situations are few.

Rather, anonymity gives many commenters the freedom to be sarcastic, glib, hateful, and oftentimes, downright stupid. I highly doubt that those who scribble some of the more lecherous comments I've read would have the stones to say those same things to the person or organization who is the target of said foul comments.

If you read my blog posts on rabble.ca, you'll note that I never reply to comments, but I do read them. Really good and insightful comments help me understand what kind of an impact my argument has made, where there might be flaws in my reasoning, or where I've written something particularly regrettable.

Unfortunately, those who agree with you (or have something intelligent to add) seldom post and those who disagree with you are too frequently rude.

I take responsibility for my writing, by using my real name. And there are moments, admittedly, when I wish I could shield myself behind a nom de plume when, in hindsight, I wish I hadn't written certain pieces. I'm human. I'm bound to be a jackass on occasion.

Those who post anonymously are, to put it strongly, cowards because they dodge all responsibility and accountability for their words.

But could this and should this be changing?

In April, a judge in Nova Scotia demanded that the identities of anonymous posters be revealed. Some commenters, hiding 'neath the shroud of pseudonyms, offered critical commentary on the Chief and Deputy Chief of the Halifax Fire Department. The commenters made accusations about racism in the fire department.

The judge stated that she doesn't "condone the conduct of anonymous Internet users who make defamatory comments. They, like other people, have to be accountable for their actions."

In a related story, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade paid Social Media Group $75,000 to "monitor social activity and help identify...areas where misinformation is being presented and repeated as fact." (see Toronto Star, Monday May 24, A6 -- as of this writing, no online copy available)

It seems that DFAIT is a bit perturbed by what it sees as anti-sealing misinformation being spread throughout the interblogwebsphere.

Countering what it deems misinformation is not an unusual practice for government or any other organization. In the past, a letter to the editor would be written and signed by an official. There was a name attached to the rebuttal.

What is concerning is if government employees and paid partisan hacks are trolling news sites, posting incendiary comments, eschewing civility, promoting propaganda, and doing so under the cover of a false name.

It's one thing to correct facts but quite another to vehemently defend a government or political party's position as a paid and anonymous operative (as an aside, you are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. So if an article says that $5 million is being spent on army shoelaces when the actual and proven figure is $3 million, then DND has a right to correct that information and the news site should retract or amend the incorrect figure).

Some news sites are promoting commenters using their real names and some are looking at giving priority to those who do not post under a pseudonym. I think this is a good policy -- it allows for legitimate use for some anonymous posts but demands people take responsibility for what they write.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.

Comments

We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:

Do

  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.

Don't

  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.