Anonymity
What role does anonymity play in the course of public debate? Does one have a responsibility to identify oneself when making potentially injurious claims against others? Or, is one immune to the mores of a civil society simply because they are able to hide behind a cloak of anonymity?
I pose these questions because of the continued blowback surrounding the City Council’s May 6 decision in favor of CiViK (the appellant) over SRM Development (the applicant) in the Bank of America appeal. The fallout has been hitting our local newspapers and the blogosphere ever since. Citizens have written letters from all sides of the issues, most of which have been expressions of opinion. However, there have been a few letters of anonymous origin that have made claims as to the propriety of individuals in our community. These anonymous letters have raised an issue that needs to be discussed.
An anonymous source, by its nature, is less reliable than a known source. When a claim is made by an anonymous source, it should carry less weight than if the same claim were made by a respected member of the community. With anonymity, the author cannot be contacted for clarification and factual statements often cannot be verified.
Anonymity can be a powerful tool. It can afford a whistle-blower the opportunity to reveal wrongdoing without fear of repercussions. It can allow a person to share his/her views in letters and on blogs without concern for what the neighbors might think of them. It is an appropriate means of communication.
But anonymity can also be a double-edged sword. Anonymity can be used as a cloak under which to hide and to make false or misleading claims that can tarnish reputations and even careers.
In the blogosphere, individuals create aliases under which they post comments. As the community gets familiar with one another, it becomes the responsibility of the community to self-regulate. When a false statement is posted online, it is the responsibility of other readers to correct the misstatement lest future readers become misinformed. This back and forth of ideas is what makes blogs so powerful. Blogs allow the public to gather and debate a subject without being present in the same time or space. Blogs can level the playing field and allow all members of a community to participate in the process without the need of being physically present.
As the owner of this blog, I believe it is my responsibility to protect the anonymity of those who choose to post comments on these pages. I also have a responsibility to keep false statements from misinforming the public. The articles and opinions I write are known to all who read these pages. There is no anonymity for the views I post — nor should there be. The reader is free to agree or disagree in public, and to disagree anonymously if they so choose. If I have erred or incorrectly stated something, I know that the readers will bring it to my attention, and I (hopefully) will correct the error and thank them for pointing it out. This is how a civil society interacts online and it works quite nicely.
The ability to share one’s views with the masses anonymously and without repercussions is a relatively new phenomenon. Technology has played a large part in changing the relationship between the public and those in control of information. Anonymous sources are used more frequently by the press than ever before. The ability to remain anonymous is important to the free flow of ideas.
I believe there is a value to the community when discussion and debate takes place on important issues. I hope that the discussions on these pages can continue in this spirit of civility. Thank you for your participation and for sharing your views.
Print This Article
Print This ArticleRelated Articles
7 Responses to “Anonymity”
Leave a Reply
Subscribe
You can subscribe by email to receive newsletter updates:
Subscribe through a RSS feed reader
OMG! An interview with Kirkland’s Jason Mesnick from “The Bachelor”
Sponsored Ads
Is that the Hooded Craw???? I loved that show as a kid. What was it called?
I guess you can call me anonymous and I am fine with that. I don’t think I want my real name out on the net. I think that being anonymous is good because it gives me the freedom to say exactly what I think and not be looking over my shoulder everytime somebody else says I’m wrong.
[Reply]
To add to the conversation,
As a working journalist, I wanted to add that the Society of Professional Journalists addresses anonymous sources and a journalist’s responsibility to be fair, accurate and accountable in the SPJ Code of Ethics. ((http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp)) Many Society of Professional Journalists’ members and some journalists honor the code and keep a copy at their desks. Bloggers are welcome to adopt the code too. Also, most newsrooms and journalists I’ve met have a written company policy. ……. Based on my personal experience in newsrooms and at training seminars, anonymous and confidential agreements are reached when the anonymous source is critical to reporting news of significant public benefit, there is a serious threat to the source’s life, family, job or health if their identity is revealed AND there is no other way to get the information. (Sometimes stories start from an anonymous source and then reporters find “on-the-record” sources to replace the anonymous source.) Some newsrooms set a higher bar, a lower bar or refuse to use anonymous sources at all. If a newsroom runs an anonymous source story, the newsoom assumes responsibility for the credibility, accuracy and fairness of the information. The public can (and often does) hold the newsroom accountable. …….. If you have questions about a specific incident or newsroom, I can’t help. Maybe you can contact the specific newsroom directly. I just wanted to let you know — the tradition, the code of ethics and the newsroom company policies exist. Whether people follow them, well, that’s another matter. I hope this helps, Jenny Z, writer, journalist and SPJ member
[Reply]
So many people are so hot-headed about these issues, and frequently I get the impression that people can not put aside their beliefs on development, the same as red state/blue state. So as a small business owner, I end up reticent to associate my livelihood with my opinion, on fears that people can not separate emotions on these issues and that I may end up with lost sales.
[Reply]
Do the math: I think you may be on to something with regard to the way people respond to their strongly held beliefs. That is one of the primary reasons I created this blog. My hope is that Kirkland Views is a safe haven for people of every stripe to express their views and as a result, we will all gain a better understanding of the issues.
I have found that people tend to only watch/listen/read the news/commentary/opinion pieces with which they agree. This may just be human nature, I really don’t know, but the result is this: people get entrenched in their beliefs and they often lose the perspective that open debate and a free flow of alternative ideas engenders. When one surrounds oneself with like-minded individuals, guess what happens? Everyone tends to agree with each other! Oustside opinions and views tend not to be considered “mainstream” and a sort of Balkanization of our community takes place.
This kind of “group think” is exactly what Kirkland Views is attempting to prevent. We promote the dissemination of ideas and the sharing of views. It is a very good thing when a community communicates in this manner and as a result everyone gains a better understanding of the issues. Consensus on major issues becomes more possible when we are open to the views of others.
We have attempted to create an open, fair and even-handed forum in which people of all stripes may communicate. We encourage the civil discussion and debate that we need in this community. In an earlier era, people gathered around the Town Square to discuss issues. Today we use the internet. Personally, I have gained a much greater understanding of the issues just by participating on these pages. I hope the same is true for you. Thank you to all for your participation, and I look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.
[Reply]
Quoting Rob Butcher ” My hope is that Kirkland Views is a safe haven for people of every stripe to express their views and as a result, we will all gain a better understanding of the issues.”
I agree and look forward to reading and considering views from all sides as long as they are rational, civil and reasonably well thought out. I genuintely hope this forum attracts people from all points of view as these debates continue. The City will be better for it.
I have not spoken at any of the hearings, but have emailed my opinions and suggestions to the appropriate parties.
[Reply]
O.K. I hope this is a safe haven as Rob has said. I am not of the stripe of those who have posted so far. I am a single mother in Juanita and the issues I care about are the environment and limiting development of hi rise condos. When I give my opinions it is usually to friends and I agree that we may seem to see things alike. I am aware that many people on this blog do not have the same values as I have. I will not participate here if it is negative. So far it has not seemed to be so except for one person. The goal of the author is good because greater understanding in the world can only lead to good things. I will choose to remain anonymous if you don’t mind.
[Reply]
For a very interesting article and discussion on this topic you can read this post on the CrossCut site http://www.crosscut.com/media/15407/ both pro and con comments follow the post.
I think anonymous postings can be useful in allowing for open discussion without fear of reprisals, but unfortunately as with so many things some people abuse the opportunity.
[Reply]