I’d say admission begins with the publication of any news story, because it is an admission by the editorial staff that “We think this is interesting.” On the opinion page, we are allowed to tip our hand and explain ourselves.
Regardless of your opinion of how a particular news organization handles a story, there is always a system of accountability. You always know the name of writers and editors, so nothing is ever said in a vacuum.
Since it was popularized in the 1990s, though, the Internet has been nothing but vacuum, a place for people to freely express opinions — sincere or otherwise — without fear of reprisal.
I’m not convinced this is a bad thing. It’s my opinion that the Internet destabilizes the transfer of information in a really spectacular way. We’re no longer at the mercy of news organizations to tell us what’s going on.
That being said, about 99 percent of what you find on the Internet is totally useless. There is page after page of bulletin boards of people still fighting over the best and worst Star Wars movies, how the media is inherently liberal/conservative, etc. It’s a lot of wasted time and space, and adds another dimension to that vulgar saying about people and opinions.
As someone who has had to sign my name to my work for the last decade, though, I can say that almost everyone abuses the spirit of anonymity. Log in to any message board and you will see post after post of reckless insults and baseless accusations. When you post on the Internet, there’s no pressure for you to have your facts right. Who cares if you hurt someone when you’re never held accountable?
But not everyone can afford to be held accountable. For example, there’s a long-standing controversy over the publication of police incident reports concerning domestic violence. The argument is this: publishing news items about domestic violence might discourage future victims from coming forward because they don’t want their dirty laundry aired in public.
The same can be said for someone expressing any opinion for others to hear or read, even when they’re correct. I was born with a stunted sense of self-preservation, which makes me an ideal candidate for this job (or a guest-spot on Jackass) so I don’t have a problem attaching my name to an unpopular opinion. I heard that a Moose Lodge discussed tarring and feathering me for something I wrote about the Confederate Flag, so I can understand why others might not be so quick to sign their name to everything they write.
Over at our website (and we have a dedicated website for Bias, if you didn’t know: localbias.blogspot.com) there was some back-and-forth following the posting of a letter by Pageland Rescue Squad Captain Patrick Sutton.
Here was the response, from “Anonymous.”
“You asked for feedback, well here you go Mr. Captain: First and foremost the few remaining squad members should reinstate those hardworking and dedicated members who were kicked off the squad by the previous executive committee for coming forward with the truth regarding the financial fiasco the squad is currently involved in.”
Someone identifying themselves as “Capt.” Has this to answer back:
“Before you throw stones have the guts to give your name. But thats o.k. because the members who want to make the squad grow and run it the right way do wear the squad shirts and are not ashamed to represent the squad unlike Jimmy and Donna who are most of the trouble in the squad now.”
Anonymous answered back that they “have the right to remain anonymous and will continue to do so and exercise my right to free speech.” Nobody ever specifically identified themselves (or Jimmy and Donna, for that) turning a private dispute into a public mess. After reading it, I have no idea what it was all about, let alone whose side to take.
Wallace McBride is editor of The Progressive Journal
No comments:
Post a Comment