anonymous blogging credibility
Discussion: Should Blogging Be Defined?
By Jill Kuraitis, 8-03-07
Note: Blog links appear at the bottom of this article, to minimize distraction in this unique case.
The Idaho blogosphere is zinging with a discussion about anonymous blogging.
MountainGoat, who writes under that name without further explanation, first raised the issue by wondering if The Idahoan is actually written by Congressman Bill Sali’s guy, Wayne Hoffman. The Idahoan lists no actual humans as contributors.
Neither does MountainGoat. In fact, the blog presents a photo of a mountain goat, which is another discussion altogether. (One that comes to mind: should we restrict the internet to mammals only? Personally, I’d like to write as a bug.)
Wednesday, MountainGoat wrote:
There are probably as many reasons for blogging anonymously as there are anonymous bloggers. Some reasons might include fear of retaliation or retribution. Others might include protecting a job, a family member or a family member’s job. Why a staff member of a U.S. Congressman would blog anonymously is a question not easily answered.
Some questions that can be easily answered are:
• Does the staff of an elected official have an ethical obligation for complete disclosure?
• Are there situations where anonymity by a public official might be acceptable and others where it might not?
• Should the public’s expectations include identity disclosure by the staff of an elected official when the blogging includes advocating for that official or his policies?
• If a congressional staffer is blogging using government time and resources, should that information be made public?
Most people would answer “yes” to all of those. So why is a staffer for Idaho Congressman Bill Sali apparently blogging anonymously at The Idahoan? Let’s see what we can find out.
Today, editorial page editor and blogger Kevin Richert at the Idaho Statesman jumped in with a thoughtful post. He opens with: “Only in the blogosphere: An anonymous Idaho left-wing blogger is trying to out an anonymous Idaho right-wing blogger.” But that didn’t show his hand, as it suggests. He writes,
“MountainGoat connects some dots between The Idahoan and Hoffman, a former reporter who left the Idaho Statesman in 2005, worked on various GOP campaigns in 2006 and joined Sali’s staff in March. The Idahoan site domain was registered in Hoffman’s name in December 2006.
So does that make Hoffman — the public face of the Sali staff — a stealth blogger on the side?”
Richert contacted Hoffman, who told him he wasn’t blogging, he was “collectively contributing commentary.”
MountainGoat responded:
The questions are legitimate and not unexpected; it does appear hypocritical on the surface. Digging deeper though, the difference between The MountainGoat Report and The Idahoan, and their anonymous authors, couldn’t be more striking. That difference is why it was important to make The Idahoan’s identity public.
As we are all aware, this country was founded on dissent and protest with perhaps the most well-known dissenter being Thomas Paine who anonymously advocated revolution in the pamphlet, “Common Sense.”Blogging is this generation’s form of dissent. That’s not to equate blogging with “Common Sense” or to suggest that it carries the same weight, but the principle is the same. It’s the little guy standing on a soapbox with a small megaphone just trying to make a difference. Every blogger has their own soapbox or cause and, as with Paine, sometimes require anonymity.
If The Idahoan had just been another anonymous little guy on a conservative soapbox there would have been no need for public disclosure. That wasn’t the case, however.
When a staff member of a government official cloaks himself as just another little guy on a soapbox with a small megaphone, when in fact he carries the very big megaphone of an elected official, that’s deceptive. And when the goal of that staff member is to build the blog into, in the words of The Idahoan, “a news source that will one day rival that of the mainstream media,” there is a word for that. It’s called propaganda.
The difference between dissent and propaganda couldn’t be more striking.
A post from another anonymous blogger, IdaBlue, reviews his exploration of The Idahoan and comments that it’s clearly a right-wing blog. IdaBlue is clearly a left-wing blog, although its writer, who won a David Neiwert Award for his election editorials, has a conservative streak on a few issues.
Since The Idahoan’s domain is registered under Wayne Hoffman’s name, it’s safe to conclude he’s writing it. Besides, he told Richert at the Statesman he is.
Is anonymous blogging a good or bad thing, or neither?
When you read an anonymous blog, how much credibility do you give it?
Should federal employees be allowed to blog at all?
What do we think of voluntary standards – a sort of Code of Conduct for bloggers?
Raise your own questions, too, and let’s discuss.
Links:
The Idahoan
The MountainGoat Report
IdaBlue
Kevin Richert’s Blog
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.



Comments
Add your comment below
Can someone break that down for me? I guess I'm just a simple country hick when I equate “collectively contributing commentary” to "blogging", right?
If federal employees are blogging anonymously that is another issue entirely, isn't it?
I personally have no problem with those anonymous bloggers out there--however, it does bug the hell out of me that I don't who Mountain Goat really is! ;) As far as I am concerned, bloggers like MG are providing a service to Idahoans by granting them access to all sorts of important information (like Sali's voting record) and if MG feels he/she can do this best or most effectively by maintaining anonymity, so be it.
Good job, MG. Serious lapses of ethical behavior need to be dragged into the light. Smacking the guy with a dead trout might be a little overboard, though :)
The online anonymity I object to is when a flaming comment is left as "anonymous." Completely lacking in courage or credibility.
Federal employees definitely ought to be allowed to blog. Soldiers are federal employees, and I want them to be able to blog. Promoting a political party or candidate while on the taxpayer dime is right out, however.
It's also a lot of crap that lets Hoffman off for his ethical violations.
HBO deserves no respect for that post.
These federal and D.C. employees may not-
Engage in political activity while:
On duty
In a government office
Wearing an official uniform
Using a government vehicle
Now that Hoffman has been outed we can label the site for what it is, a Sali propaganda site. But it already resembled that anyway. Hell it was the first I heard of it.
But I also recognize the point that this issue is getting a little overblown. For me the issue isn't about anonymous blogging, its about Wayne's propensity to flirt with his ethical responsibilities and Sali's willingness to overlook it. Not a good quality in a Congressman.
Tara you make a good point and Wayne still hasn't answered when, where and how he participated on the blog.
I fail to understand why anyone blogs on the bosses time, kind of like stealing from him, a little at a time.
1) Jill, you'd make a cute blogging bug...probably the first, even!
2) I stand by the decision I made to post the story on Hoffman. Of course he's going to try to discredit me and minimize his role or responsibility for the site...what else can he do?
3) I also stand by what I said regarding the difference between my blogging and Hoffman's blogging. To me it's a no-brainer.
4) Alan makes a good point about personas. Anyone who has been reading my blog for any length of time knows what I'm basically about. I'm just an average person who was fed up with Idaho politics and the status quo. I grew up on a small farm in Southern Idaho. I survived Idaho public education, served in the Marine Corps and now live in rural Canyon County...it's all been written about in the blog. I invite anyone who is curious, go ahead and search through the archives on my site; you might find some things that would surprise you. Either you like what I write, find it credible and keep reading, or you don't. No big deal either way.
Nobody should assume that stated facts on any blog are necessarily true. When I read something that amazes me, I always double check it other places. It would obviously be wrong to blog from the job-- whether government or private employee. There are a lot of reasons to be anonymous given the mentality of some people out there-- right and left-- who become threatening when views are expressed that they don't like.
http://theidahoan.com/2007/07/15/psst-can-you-help-me-fool-the-public-thanks-much-.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Sali
Wikipedia has gone so far as to ban some Congressional addresses from posting to Wikipedia because of abuse by staffers attempting to do this sort of whitewash.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020302610_pf.html
http://billsalifan.blogspot.com/