| Author |
Messages |
|
Steve Heller
Posts:366
 |
| 07/01/2007 9:09 PM |
 Alert
|
This is a fine Monday morning for a short rant about one of my biggest bugaboos - anonymous comments on web and blog sites.
I realize that the web has its own version of civility, or lack
thereof, but arguably anonymous postings are not simply a breach of
good manners, they are cowardly too.
For those of us who write on the web - whether formally or informally -
and allow for comments and critique in return, the very least that can
be asked of respondents is that they sign their real names (and perhaps
even offer a link to their whereabouts).
On many occassions pieces I have written on AIGA VOICE or DO have been challenged -
which is fine and even welcome - but at least half of these challenges
appear with only first name or false signatures.
Such behavoir is not tolerated in magazines and newspapers - not only
must letters to the editor carry a bonafide signature, they are often
fact-checked as well. But on the web - even those sites that require
validation - commentors are not asked to show anything but a viable
email address (which itself can be bogus).
So, if this is going to be a "hot" medium as McLuhan would call it -
one where the exchange of ideas and interchange of critique is viewed
as healthy - then have the courage of one's convictions and sign your
posts with a name that stands the test of courage and honesty.
The rant for today is over.
|
|
|
|
Emily Gordon
Posts:34
|
| 07/02/2007 4:13 PM |
Alert
|
| Hear, hear! I don't like them much either, though not all anonymous comments are nasty, of course. Newspaper and magazine letters sections do run the occasional [name withheld]--what if a whistle-blower needed to protect his or her job? I'm not sure there are that many other instances where it's acceptable and not cowardly. |
|
|
|
|