Online and anonymous. For how long?
By Steve McClure on Wed, Jun 17, 2009
Anonymous posts online soon will get a run through the courts in Nevada after a federal prosecutor decided to go after all kinds of information about posters at the Las Vegas Review Journal’s web site.
According to an AP report in Editor and Publisher:
Along with the real names of people who posted comments, the subpoena asks the newspaper for the writers’ gender, birth date, physical address, telephone number, Internet service provider, IP address and credit card numbers.
The comments reportedly were posted under a story on the grand jury proceedings into allegations of tax fraud against the owner of a construction company in Las Vegas. Initial indications is the prosecutors are going after the posters because of perceived threats of violence.
But, Review-Journal editor Thomas Mitchell noted in the AP report, “anonymous speech is ‘a fundamental and historic part of this country.’”
Anonymous posters are an oft-debated part of the online conversation, and a part that we’re familiar with here at DNews.com. It’s also an area that is still fairly wide open. There’s no shortage of opinions on whether people should be allowed to post under pseudonyms in the online world — particularly at newspapers.
So far, though, there just aren’t that many instances when the courts have stepped in to demand the names of people who have posted.
A ruling in favor of federal prosecutors could dramatically alter the nature of online conversations.
UPDATE:
The Review Journal reports that prosecutors have since scaled back their request to the identities of just two of the 175 commenters on the story.
A ruling on this might not swing the door open as wide as it would have gone if the previous request had stood. Still, it would create significant angst in a number of newsrooms.
Tags: Notes On News
June 18th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Steve,
As you know, I have mixed feelings about this.
When anonymous posters make libelous/slanderous accusations, or make threats, then they should be held accountable for their words.
We’ve seen this in spades over on Venom2020 where someone can create an anonymous login, make all sorts of false statements (that are then archived and preserved for eternity for Google searches), and there’s no accountability for those remarks.
best,
Dale
June 18th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Dale,
An interesting update is the Review-Journal has complied with the request:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003985573
The key, it seems, was the perceived threat to harm people. As the editor put it, “I’d hate to be the guy who refused to tell the feds McVeigh was buying fertilizer.”
What frightened me about the initial request was how sweeping the subpoena was. As a matter of course, I believe attaching your name to something is important — it’s one of the reasons we began signing our staff editorials about 10 years ago. At the same time, anonymous speech has played a significant role in this country’s history of public debate.
I believe the courts will hash out a great many details on Internet commenting in the coming years. It will be one of those area I plan to watch (right up there with copyright law). I believe there’s room for more accountability, but I’m also worried about the potential for a serious chilling effect on public discourse.
I appreciate your comments.
– Steve
April 9th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
North Port Florida Business Reviews