Anonymity shouldn't pay (even in Sheffield)

Finally anonymity on the Internet is being punished. The Guardian today reports on anonymous Sheffield Wednesday bloggers who are being sued by the club for their abusive comments. This is heartening news. It is only when anonymous bloggers are made legally liable for their views that the Internet will become a civilized medium for responsible adults. I applaud the actions of Sheffield Wednesday football club, its chairman and its board of directors. After more than 100 years of anonymity, the club has finally accomplished something of note.

Comments

[David Stuart]

Maybe a bit harsh describing a three times FA cup winning football team as having over 100 years of anonymity...[source- the much maligned wikipedia]

[Paul Bradshaw]

The case wasn't about bloggers at all - it was about messageboard posters.

[gabriel christou]

please visit
www.gabrielchristou.blogspot.com

you will see PHOTOS of WHO and WHERE Bin Laden and his NETWORKS ARE….

URGENT…PLEASE HELP…. I CANNOT FROM HERE….. I AM BLOCKED ALL AROUND
FORWARD THIS INFORMATION TO THE FBI.

gavriild@gmail.com

[Hater]

Andrew keen is a douche bag.

[Simon]

I think their two finals in one year against Arsenal, did push toward minor public recognition. Even though they were gracious losers - following a rich English tradition :). I agree though that if you want to get nasty, do it openly rather than hiding behind some dodgy alias... Simon

[Brian Connolly]

Andrew,

Of all the ideas you put forth, your beliefs re: anonymity are completely wrongheaded. Anonymity is fundamental and inextricably tied to free speech. Thats' "free," as in no consequence.

Will there be abuse? Absolutely. As with everything. But we have the laws and capability to protect against it.

Here: we tailor technology to accommodate ideals; we don't screw with ideals to accommodate technology.

Regards,

Brian Connolly

[Mick O]

I was thrilled to discover Mr Keen's views on the cult of the amateur.. and now he has to go and post this.

I have two main objections:

One:
There is room, indeed a necessary role for anonymity -- in some corners of the Internet. Political dissent is a human right. There are situations where anonymity is the only way to safely advance positive agendas for political change. I understand Mr. Keen may make room for this in his assessment but was overly broad in his response to this story.

Two:
Mr. Keen says: "It is only when anonymous bloggers are made legally liable for their views that the Internet will become a civilized medium for responsible adults."

People should not be held liable for their views! Rather, they should be liable for their actions. And, the liability should match the true effect of those actions. By this I mean that if actions are merely verbally "abusive" then the punishment should roughly equal some verbal abuse.

Overreacting to something posted on the Internet -- litigation over something you disagree with -- is not the hallmark of "responsible adults."

[InsultComicDog]

So, Mr. Keen, are you going to retract the misinformation you posted about Markos Moulitsas in your book?

[Thucydides Jr.]

I do wish those rank amateurs who wrote the Federalists papers would have refrained from anonymity. Just who did they think they were, founders of a nation or something? I mean, who can have a serious conversation about things like national constitutions if they choose to be anonymous? I think it spoiled the whole process.

[wYLDbILL]

"so, Mr. Keen, are you going to retract the misinformation you posted about Markos Moulitsas in your book?"

Of course not, InsultComicDog. Don't you know that being a "real" journalist like Mr. Keen means never having to say you are sorry---or that you are a lazy incompetent hack at your chosen profession?