LARRY'S CORNER- Hamilton's Former Mayor Speaks

Bloggers Beware: you are not as invisible as you think!

By Larry Di Ianni
(posted August 28, 2009)

One of the truly exciting aspects of the Internet has been a virtual explosion in citizen journalism and citizen publishing.  This has allowed the spread of information and opinion-sharing to increase exponentially.  Most of it has been welcomed by the world; and this phenomenon has helped shape public opinion.  The two best recent examples of how global society has been well-served by this new and more democracy-supporting technology dealt with the events in Iran after the fraudulent presidential elections, and in China during the recent uprisings in several parts of that country.

Prior to the advent of the technology, citizen journalism may have been limited to the occasional reportage; it certainly would not have been as prolific, graphic and accurate as it demonstrated itself to be.  We were all riveted by the visuals of brutality and murder on the one hand, but courage and determination on the other as events unfolded before our eyes in far away places.

Locally, our city’s daily, The Spectator contributed to citizen involvement in the events of our city with a popular, and now discontinued, Hallmarks on-line interactive addition to the daily news focussing on City Hall matters and moderated by the Spec’s municipal reporter, Nicole MacIntyre.  As well,  an interesting on-line publication called Raise the Hammer, moderated by Ryan McGreal has also achieved success among local community watchers.  This publication is eclectic in nature but mainly focuses on the city’s development from a progressive perspective.  Most of the articles are well-written contributions by an array of citizens with a perspective on the city and a viewpoint to proselytize.

Another on-line publication is called CATCH by a group of city hall watchers who have a decidedly anti-business slant on the world.  This is not an interactive publication.  The group isn’t interested in others’ opinions, only in letting readers know theirs.  The premise is almost always faulty, but consistent and literate.  For this group, facts are there to be ‘spun’ to correspond with a particular world-view and to convince others of the righteousness of this perspective, not to inform the reader thereby allowing individuals to reach their own conclusions.  Their unsigned articles are as much propaganda sprinkled with information, as they are selectively chosen information pushing a particular propaganda.  However, the articles, except for the ones bordering on slander written several years ago, are interesting to read.

The latest publication which has come to my attention (and there are probably many I don’t know anything about) is called The Hamiltonian, moderated by citizen journalist, song-writer, provincial bureaucrat Cal Di Falco. Cal makes no bones about the fact that he is trying to fill a void vacated by Hallmarks.

With the exception of CATCH which is not interactive, the others all offer, or offered, the ability to express an opinion on the published article by its reading audience.  The choice of whether to identify oneself or remain anonymous was given to the on-line contributor.  With Raise the Hammer the diverse authors always sign their pieces.  Those responding seldom do.   Hallmarks and the Hamiltonian always had the discussion initiated by the moderator.  CATCH doesn’t identify anyone as the writer of the opinion piece.   But what makes the publications dangerous for both the hosts of the publications as well as the occasional participants is the anonymity.

Recently, Google has had to divulge the identity of anonymous bloggers in a much-reported on case.  I believe the courts have concluded that in situations of slander, anonymous, on-line slander is still against the law.  And for those of us who have been victimized in our community by cowardly, unsigned, scurrilous, distorted and untrue diatribe, making sure that people take ownership of what they say is a positive step.  I am, of course, not talking about legitimate criticism or opposition to one’s point of view or even stating one’s distaste for an individual’s position or that individual him/herself.  I am talking about hidden verbal and written lies meant to damage reputations while hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.  It seems that the fig-leaf of confidentiality has been removed by the courts.  Let us now see if it curbs intemperate bloggers!

BACK TO LARRY'S CORNER

HOME