Category Archives: anonymity

Mathew Ingram: Anonymous Comments: Are They Good or Evil?

Posted on by
Reply
"I think that persistent (and quasi-verified) identity agents like Facebook Connect and OpenID can help with some of the problems that online comments have — not necessarily “real” identity so much as persistent identity. It’s not really important that I know who Shelley456 is when she comments, but if she is Shelley456 everywhere she comments, then she has devoted some time (theoretically) to establishing that identity, and therefore will be less likely to destroy it by spewing Nazi hate in some online comment board."

Your Right To Know: When Brooke met Brooker

Posted on by
Reply
Heather Brooke on Charlie Brooker's Newswipe: "I’m talking here about the way journalists grant public officials anonymity for no good reason. By the very definition of their role, official spokespeople have absolutely no reason to be anonymous yet one of the more dubious practices of the British press is the way reporters collude with officials by granting anonymity."

Martin Moore Blog: An unnecessary unmasking that does more than just damage The Times’ reputation

Posted on by
Reply
"By taking the decision to expose Night Jack The Times has almost certainly deprived us of voices that would otherwise have spoken out. It will probably have made whistleblowers and anonymous sources think twice before releasing information. It has, in other words, done a good job of suppressing free speech and freedom of expression."

Shane Richmond: Naming Nightjack: The Times was right legally but wrong morally

Posted on by
Reply
Shane Richmond: "I can see the sense in both The Times's argument and Mr Justice Eady's. The legal case is clear but I'm less comfortable with the moral case. Nightjack was trying to shed light on his work and bring the public a view of policing that could only be done anonymously. Shouldn't newspapers be protecting people like him? Certainly, The Times would have protected him had he been their source. But being out on his own meant that he was fair game."

PC Bloggs: The Real Blows in Life

Posted on by
Reply
Another blogging cop writes: "I do ... think it is ironic that police blogger Nightjack's identity has been revealed by the ruling of a judge who on the same day ruled that the Beckhams' old nanny must make a formal apology for breaching their confidence some years ago. Of course, the Beckhams aren't bloggers, just international celebrities whose lives are generally available for public consumption. So clearly they require more protection than an erstwhile Lancashire detective constable who donates his off-duty earnings to charity."

One Man and His Blog: The Times vrs NightJack: Destroying Journalists’ Reputation

Posted on by
Reply
Adam Tinworth: "I think that it's absolutely despicable that a journalistic operation did this. The 'public interest' figleaf they're using blows away the second you consider that they've made it easier for people to connect the blog posts with real cases, not harder."

Comment is Free: NightJack blog: How the Times silenced the voice of valuable frontline reporter

Posted on by
Reply
Jean Seaton: "What is puzzling is the Times attack. The paper has made an intelligent use of blogs, and has been good at fighting the use of the courts to close down expression. NightJack was a source and a reporter. They would not (I hope) reveal their sources in court. Even odder is their main accusation against him: that the blog revealed material about identifiable court cases. The blog did not do this – cases were disguised. However, once the Times had published Horton's name then, of course, it is easy to find the cases he was involved with. The Times has shut down a voice."

Comment is Free: NightJack blog: How the Times silenced the voice of valuable frontline reporter

Posted on by
Reply
Jean Seaton: "What is puzzling is the Times attack. The paper has made an intelligent use of blogs, and has been good at fighting the use of the courts to close down expression. NightJack was a source and a reporter. They would not (I hope) reveal their sources in court. Even odder is their main accusation against him: that the blog revealed material about identifiable court cases. The blog did not do this – cases were disguised. However, once the Times had published Horton's name then, of course, it is easy to find the cases he was involved with. The Times has shut down a voice."