This post may make Bubba angry, and if so, I apologize in advance; it isn't meant as questioning his decision to blog under a pseudonym, but a quick exploration of the whole issue of anonymity and accountability in the blogosphere.
First the background, for anyone who hasn't heard it already; Brian Conley of Metro Pulse, over-reacting to some fairly harsh criticism of a piece two of his writers had in the MP, made a thinly veiled threat to:
Now anyone who reads me knows that Bubba and I agree on very little, and that both of us have been very vocal in that disagreement. However, what most people don't know is that I've met Bubba's alter ego more than once, and in each case, we got along. He's a very cordial and personable gentleman; as he's said himself several times, in the real world he's nowhere near as outspoken as Bubba. This doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't share the same convictions; just that in the real world, he seems to be more accomodating of differing points of view.
And that's kind of what bugs me about the whole anonymous blogging thing. When you create an internet identity, it becomes a character you play. Put enough work into it and it takes on a life of it's own. You may find yourself saying and doing things you'd never imagine saying or doing in the real world. The freedom is exhilarating, but like everything, there is a downside as well. Anonymity brings not only the freedom to say virtually anything, but also removes accountability, or at least pushes it step or two away.
And this can be a bad thing.
Consider that both the Sons of Liberty and the KKK made extensive use of anonymous broadsides and psuedonymous pamphleteers. We already know that words have the power to cause tremendous damage. Our hate speech laws and sexual harassment laws have codfied that damage and apportioned penalties for engaging in unlawfully damaging speech. We know that a continued atmosphere of hostility increases the likelihood of violence against the target of the hostility. Unfortunately, anonymity can be abused to create just such a dangerous atmosphere.
Now Conley accused Bubba of abusing anonymity, which implies that he thought Bubba was creating a dangerous atmosphere. Obviously, Conley was totally wrong. Laying aside for moment the fact that most of the harsher criticisms came from third party comments, pointing out bad writing as bad writing hardly creates a hostile atmosphere where the writer would feel fear for their lives. Their jobs maybe, but not their lives. This whole flap is a lot of worry over nothing.
But still, the fact remains that anonymous writers can do a lot of real damage, and never be held accountable and that bugs me. But how do you go about protecting society from the irresponsible twits who can't be trusted not to yell "Fire" in the movie theater without clamping down on those of us who can play by the rules?
Damned if I know. Anonymous commentary is vital to our freedom; it may very well be that abuse of that freedom is an unavoidable price we'll have to pay. All I know for sure is that when I started this thing, I made a decision to blog under my name, in part just to avoid having to deal with the whole accountability thing. Anything I say here, and for that matter, any comments I allow to stay here, are my responsibility. That knowledge has kept me from going off the deep end more than once.
That and the fact that my mom reads this stuff.
Posted by Rich at June 20, 2005 11:42 PM | TrackBack