.

Jeff Ward: If You Can't Put Your Name on It, It Ain't Worth Saying!

It's time to put an end to Internet anonymity.

Internet anonymity needs to go, and it needs to go now!

Last week, I called Samantha Liss to determine the content of a reader response she’d removed from my column. Comments that don’t make the cut are typically the wackiest ones, and I was hoping to have a good laugh with our esteemed Glen Ellyn Patch editor.

Samantha echoed the lament of so many Patch editors who aren’t sure exactly when to pull that delete trigger. Get too crazy and you kill the conversation. But a too laissez-faire approach can lead to a few nameless loudmouths dominating the debate, which can cause a mass exodus of readers.

Why is it that it’s the silliest of subjects that tend to set people off the most? I’m afraid to even say the phrase “!” In Glen Ellyn, attempting to was more than enough to set some folks off the deep end. Of course, the worst comments always seem to come at the hands of those “courageous” folks who insist on employing an alter ego.

And that’s exactly where the trouble starts: anonymity.

In a recent Geneva Patch column on our ineffectual new , we discussed what automobile-induced quasi-invisibility can do to the average driver. But as scary as that can be, that social-norm-dissolving situation pales in comparison to the effects of Internet invisibility.

And what does this say about us? That, like a , our veneer of civilization and respectability only exists as long as someone’s observing us?

Samantha submitted the Glen Ellyn Bulletin Board as a prime example of online commentary gone wild. Considering the stupidity I read there, I won’t justify the forum’s absurd existence with a link.

The only journalism award I’ve ever won (and I had to share that one with then-Beacon-News Managing Editor Rick Nagel) was an honorable mention for religion reporting. Rick and I told the story of a group of Geneva parishioners who had challenged their monsignor and how the ensuing factional fighting was tearing the church apart.

But what was far worse than a subtle parish civil war was a website orchestrated by the group who supported the monsignor. These “good church-going folks,” under a veil of fictitious names, tore into their fellow parishioners like a monkey on a cupcake.

You’d think that’s about as low as anyone could go until you realize that public officials are using online aliases to strike back at their “enemies.” More than one Patch editor has conveyed their suspicions regarding this phenomenon. When I first started taking on some Kane County insiders, a small group of political cyberstalkers started dogging my every Beacon-News move.

The funny thing is, they’re fooling no one. I’ve always had a pretty good idea who they were. A piece of writing—even something as short as a Patch comment—is not unlike a fingerprint. Because it’s so difficult to consciously change your writing style, some folks use the same phrasing in both public and private discussions.

The speed with which they had certain information also limited the commenter pool to a shallow group of nitwits.

So, let me take this opportunity to remind these petulant and cowardly politicians that, as a Daily Herald court case just taught us, it isn’t very difficult to pierce the veil of anonymity, and libel laws don’t exclude things said on the Internet.

Thankfully, because of the very circumstances we’re discussing here, an increasing number of Net news outlets are requiring readers to use their real names.

Yes! I’ve heard from readers who fear that putting their names on the Net is far too dangerous. That’s a load of you-know-what. I’ve been writing controversial columns for six years, and I’m still here. That kind of faulty logic is actually a form of conceit. As much as I love each and every reader, neither you nor I are that important.

If you do insist on using an alias, at least make it a good one. “Al Truistic?” “Cornelious Cornswallow?” “John Locke?” For some strange reason, I fail to believe that an 18th century English philosopher came back to life just to pursue his dream of posting his thoughts on Patch.

Though “Mr. Locke” often makes excellent and very cogent comments, in the end, he's like the 7-year-old who, after calling a playmate a nincompoop, runs behind his mother’s dress and hides.

I don’t think Patch’s terms of use are strong enough. I think any reader who wants to join the debate should be required to disclose his or her full name and provide an address (for verification purposes only, not for public consumption.)

The bottom line is this. I love writing for Patch because no other venue provides this kind of direct link to readers. Though my motto has always been “continuing the conversation,” some of you have me at a disadvantage. You know who I am, but I don’t know who you are.

And as much as it pains me to say this, if you don’t offer me the same courtesy, I will be forced to ignore your posts.

By all means, and within the bounds of reason, let’s keep the conversation going. I love hearing what you’re thinking. It doesn’t get any better than the discussion following my .

But, as I also like to say, if you can’t find the fortitude to put your real name on it, then it ain’t worth saying.

TCB October 01, 2011 at 03:16 PM
His comparison is right on the money. Journalists and their sources are protected by anonymity so the truth can be told. Why would those same rights not be extended to those who comment? It's a new media Jeff. Roll with it.
Scott C. October 22, 2011 at 06:19 PM
Wow, Jeff...wow. Perhaps the best "PS" to this particular "piece" is seeing how freely you're engaging with so many who do not have a last name included with their comments to your most recent article. http://downersgrove.patch.com/articles/jeff-ward-occupy-the-western-suburbs I've seen no better example of the hypocrisy you are so often accused of in your engagement here on the Patch than this. Proof. In. Pudding.
Mike Garrity October 22, 2011 at 06:40 PM
Agreed, Scott. Look at any of the recent "columns" and you'll notice nothing but odd names or just initials on the submissions. Anonymous posters don't really seem to bother Mr. Ego unless they disagree with him. And also note that for those who disagree and use their full names, Ward will launch a personal attack. As he did with one man who posted a comment...and Ward attacked him because the guy's MOTHER held a position with a Geneva organization. Ward is nothing more than a schoolyard bully that the "editor" here, Rick Nagel, is in awe of.
Scott C. October 22, 2011 at 07:14 PM
You're generous to call it a "column" even with quotes. I won't even concede it is an "opinion" piece. Most opinion pieces (outside of tabloids) don't involve attacking others who offer their own opinions. Poor Jeff seems to be unable to grasp that the nature of an opinion piece will, in turn, prompt others to share their opinions and that fostering the interesting dialogue that results from diversity of opinions is far more noble a goal (for the columnist AND the publication in/on which it appears) than simply telling every person with a differing opinion that they are just wrong and then engaging in trollish bullying behavior as he insists that there is only one correct opinion...his. If, in fact, Patch editors don't see such behavior as problematic, they're either in over their heads with Jeff or believe that getting numbers through any means to woo advertisers is worth any cost of the publication's reputation and quality. If the former is the case, they should decide what kind of publication they want the Patch to be, man up, and call Jeff out when he treats readers like children. If the latter is the case they should be reminded that is the business model of tabloids. If they're ok with that, it might be time to find new editors. Funny thing is that I tend to agree with Jeff's position on issues more often then not (once you cut through the BS to get to his actual positions). I just find his manner of engaging with others to be petty and pathetic.
Jeffrey Crane October 22, 2011 at 07:45 PM
Simply put, you can blame the lawyers for the reams of legislation whereby you can be sued or arrested for just making a mean gesture to an individual. That is why few will ever again be placed in any compromising situation. The written word, the spoken word, the gesture. The last bastion of freedom you had is gone. Most will live underground. How depressing and regressive a society. All the political correctness makes my head spin.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »