Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Anonymous Blogger Outed By Politician

Posted by kdawson on from the by-what-right dept.

Snoskred writes with the story of a blogger who chose to remain pseudonymous, who has been outed by an Alaskan politician in his legislative newsletter. Alaska Rep. Mike Doogan had been writing bizarre emails to people who emailed him, and the Alaskan blogger "Mudflats" was one of those who called him on it. (Mudflats first began getting noticed after blogging about Sarah Palin from a local point of view.) Doogan seems to have developed a particular itch to learn who Mudflats is, and he finally found out, though he got her last name wrong, and named her in his official newsletter. The Huffington Post is one of the many outlets writing about the affair. The blogger happens to be Democrat — as is Doogan — but that is immaterial to the question of the right to anonymity in political speech. Does an American have the right to post political opinion online anonymously? May a government official breach that anonymity absent a compelling state interest?

7 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. Uhhh by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does an American have the right to post political opinion online anonymously?

    Sure.

    May a government official breach that anonymity absent a compelling state interest?

    Why yes. Everyone has the right to keep their identity a secret.. but no-one has the right to prevent others from discovering their secrets.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but no-one has the right to prevent others from discovering their secrets.

      So does you proclamation apply to whisle blowers, people in witness protection, confidential documents, your SSN, trade secrets, etc.

      People have a perfect right to protect their secrets, otherwise they wouldn't be secrets.

    2. Re:Uhhh by RodgerDodger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, that is not the case. Government officials in particular have a greater duty to protect your privacy than the average citizen, due to their access to greater-than-normal tools to violate it.

      If, for example, Rep. Doogan abused his office to discover Mudflat's identity, then that would be a serious problem.

      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    3. Re:Uhhh by julioody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except he's a public official. I for one very much doubt he did this in his own time, or with his own money.

      The blogger committed no crime, as from TFA. So what gives?

      Hate to state the obvious, but that strikes me as a personal vendetta being pursued while the fine representative should be more concerned with matters of public interest.

    4. Re:Uhhh by dexmachina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree, with one reservation. If Rep. Doogan discovered the blogger's identity using channels that would be available to anyone, then he was well within his rights to "oust him"...otherwise, you're effectively arguing that Mudflats' right to anonymity trumps Doogan's right to free speech. However, if he used his position as a government official to access information not available to the general public, then his actions were an abuse of power.

  2. Anonomity should not be required by pwizard2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm disturbed that an American would feel that they should have to be anonymous to post political speech. There should be no threat of reprisal whatsoever; in fact the politicians should be the ones who are worried about what the electorate thinks of them.

    --
    "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
    1. Re:Anonomity should not be required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd guess that it isn't the politicians that one would be worried about.