Transparency for the Blogosphere?

Clearly anonymity has its place in the blogosphere and Web 2.0. In my opinion, anonymity is most justified when the author is writing in a country in which the government doesn’t represent the citizens. In other words, the politically oppressed or censored are justified in writing anonymously.

On the other end of the spectrum, however, writers who spread rumors about political candidates in democracies are much less justified in writing anonymously. Whenever possible, I sign my name to the comments I post on a blog. People, some sponsored by political money, spreading rumors about candidates is thought to be one of the most egregious ethical violations on the Internet. Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist, agrees.

We launched the Ethical Blogger Project in part because we anticipated the viciousness of the political debate to increase to unprecedented levels as the 2008 U.S. Presidential elections approach. We use the word “blog” broadly to cover participatory media on the Internet. Also, if we can remind bloggers and the Web 2.0 community in general to behave decently, we can stave off government regulation of the Internet. In other words, let’s try to avoid a situation in which a few bad apples spoil the Web for everyone.

It looks like our premise was correct. Wired magazine reports that candidates are already under attack on YouTube. See “Hillary Clinton Faces a Viral-Video 'Truth-Boating'” by Sarah Lai Stirland. The article reports on a video, titled “The Shocking Video Hillary Does NOT Want You To See!” circulating around the Internet that charges that the Democratic frontrunner “underreported campaign contributions to the Federal Election Commission.” The video is complete with dark, scary music at appropriate moments and is presented in interview style—Peter Paul, the video’s creator, interviews himself.

The Wired article describes the “colorful past” of the video’s creator: “He was convicted of scamming Fidel Castro in the late 1970s, and later of traveling with a fake identity. Most recently he pleaded guilty in 2005 to manipulating the stock price of his internet company Stan Lee Media, which he co-founded with the famous comic-book king.”

Republican candidates aren’t safe from attack on the Internet either. As the article mentions, Rudolf Giuliani has been criticized by firefighters and others. Should we be looking into the political contributions made by the firefighters’ families? If there is a political agenda, does it disqualify their views?

The credibility, motive, and accountability of sources of information on the Internet are the issues here. Thanks to the Wired article, we know more about the background of the author of the Hillary video. But what about authors that remain anonymous? And to what degree should we check the background of a blogger or author on Web 2.0? What can we learn from journalism? A newspaper reader might assume that the newspaper company vets its writers, but should we worry about the motives or backgrounds of journalists?

A more credible blogger should get more traffic, thereby creating a virtuous cycle of increasing the influence of his or her blog. The Ethical Blogger Project also hopes to showcase ethical bloggers so that they might act as an example for others.