You Can’t Hide Behind Your Blog Anymore

August 19, 2009
Posted by Ryan Graves

You Can’t Hide Behind Your Blog Anymore

Transparency in a digital world is a very good thing. You all know that I’m very transparent with my activities on the web. I always sign-up for service with my real name and I’ve never left an anonymous blog comment in my life. I really do believe that if you’re going to do something on the web or otherwise, you should be comfortable with that action being viewed by all. What others in the web world might call transparency, I call integrity.

By no means am I trying to get on a high horse here and call out anyone who uses their initials or a fake name. Some people just aren’t as comfortable putting their ‘identity’ out there, and maybe for good reason. There are people out there that may use that information against you but I think there are more positives to being digitally transparent than there are negatives. I guess only time will tell.

Recently a Manhattan supreme court judge ruled that model, Liskula Cohen, was entitled to know the identity of the blogger behind a Blogger.com hosted blog called, ‘Skanks in NYC’ (since taken down). The judge ordered Google, which ran the offending blog, to turn it over. This is just a small example in the larger “blogosphere” of transparency taking over the digital world, but I do believe it sets a precedent.

The blog post about Ms Cohen read, “I would have to say the first-place award for ‘Skankiest in NYC’ would have to go to Liskula Gentile Cohen a 40-something who may have been hot 10 years ago, when she was actually 36.” I love how Ms Cohen handled this situation, she wasn’t trying to press charges, she just wanted the anonymity of the blogger to be removed. I agree with her, it will likely change the behavior of this blogger. I will also say that maybe this bloggers comments will change her behavior.

So what does this mean for future bloggers? It means that hopefully they will no longer be able to cowardly hide behind their URL. Your name, your identity, and more powerfully, your reputation is now directly associated with the content you publish on the web. I appreciate this judges movement to cut down on “cyber bullying” (lame term, but descriptive) and more or less force transparency, authenticity, and my favorite, integrity on the web. We’re going in the right direction.

Judge: ‘Skanks in NYC’ blogger may be unmasked (news.cnet.com)
Ruling could let model find, sue online heckler (cnn.com)
Judge Says Blogger Who Called Model A Skank Should Be Unmasked (techdirt.com)

0 Comments

Posted Under Mistakes & Lessons Technology

Ryan Graves

@mhoffma

I really appreciate these thoughts...a few responses...

Regarding your thoughts on my conclusion, "It just means that you can't
break the law and expect to get away with it online, anonymous or not."

I think that if it doesn't mean we are already in a situation where bloggers
can't hide behind their URLs it at least means that we're moving towards
that scenario. Openness normally causes people to be more intelligent and
respectful.

Which leads to your statement, "Sometimes anonymity is great for letting
people show their true colors. I wouldn't want to force anyone either way."

I totally agree, I want people to have the opportunity and I wouldn't want
to 'force' openness on someone, they should have the opportunity to share
open or closed and share whatever they'd like (free speech), however
people's anonymously shared true colors aren't always that valuable. Sadly.

Thanks again.
Ryan

share flag

spam
offensive
disagree
off topic

ryangraves

mhoffma

Anonymity is necessary where free speech does not exist or results in extreme consequences. WikiLeaks is a great example of how anonymity on the net can provide a positive outlet.

While I agree certain parts of the web would benefit from transparency, I wouldn't want the entire web this way. You fail to mention that the Google decision (I'm guessing - you didn't say) was due to a libel case. It would be the only legal means for this action and it certainly doesn't set any kind of precedent.

If people want to fill their blogs with "transparency, authenticity, and ... integrity" they will (and certainly there are many that already do) and will find the benefit in maintaining that kind of blog.

Sometimes anonymity is great for letting people show their true colors. I wouldn't want to force anyone either way.

Your conclusion: "So what does this mean for future bloggers? It means that hopefully they will no longer be able to cowardly hide behind their URL." Not so much. It just means that you can't break the law and expect to get away with it online, anonymous or not.

ShanaC

I don't. I even wrote why I didn't. I think Google Sold Out, big time. The last time they chose not to that I remember, which was in my school district, probably helped keep the election fare. The transparency doesn't benefit everyone. Something not mentioned in those posts were the fact that tensions during that election mentioned in that lawsuit ran so high that there were rumors of miscounts on purpose...Anonymity helped quell most of the worst of it (but not all).

http://www.shanacarp.com/essays/google-lost-its...

You're on the good side of the camp, we need more people using their real
names as URLs and social networking usernames. Clear identity is key.

I never thought about domain registrations...might make people think twice
before registering skanks.com huh?

Steffan Antonas

I completely agree with you as well, Ryan. This is definitely a positive first step.

Thanks Fraser. It will be interesting to see how this realization weeds out certain type of content and content producers.

Fraser

Completely agree with your conclusion - this is a positive first step toward transparency that can benefit everyone.

THE DREAM IN ACTION

By Ryan Graves