Chilling bloggers

As we move from October into November, the fallout from several online incidents mirrors the sudden briskness I feel in the weather. Do you feel it too?

Recently, one weblogger declared he had figured out the identity of the tech industry blogger at Dead 2.0, who wrote under a pseudonym. As you may infer from the blogger's name, Dead 2.0 frequently critized Web 2.0 hype, and for this reason, there were a few people who wished he (or she?) would just shut up.

Rogers Cadenhead is being threatened with legal action for comments left by readers at his blog, Workbench.

Moving into feminist circles, Zuzu of Feministe, who also writes under a pseudonym, recently posted her concern about being involuntarily outted, and the possibility of legal action.

Zuzu's conflict was sorted out; the same can't be said of Dead 2.0, whose website contents have been removed, leaving only a graphic that cheerily states, "We'll be back!"

I won't hold my breath.

Here are a few more voices on what causes a blogging chilling effect.

Thus Spake Zuska:

"Why do you think that I am able to rant so freely, express the truth so bluntly, expose morons to the blinding light of revelation with impunity, all under my real name? It's because I have no job. And I'm not talking about how having no job gives me extra hours in the day to blog. I'm talking about something else that having no job gives me. It gives me no fear. I do not fear retribution. And I do not fear being censored."

She then cites an example of what she considers to be censorship, and points out the women in science on her blogroll:

"Look at the blogroll to the left. I have lots of links to nice blogs all written by actual women scientists. They write eloquently, poignantly on gender and science issues. Do they write under their real names? They do not. Why do you suppose this is?"

To find out, continue reading her post, "Censorship", at Thus Spake Zuska.

Alecto Erinyes has written a thoughtful and incisive piece about the nature of the internet and self-censorship. She uses a mainstream media story about Naomi Parry, a contributor to the popular blog, Larvatus Prodeo, as launching point for her thoughts.

Alecto makes several very good points in her post, which is mostly concerned with repercussions for public figures, or potentially public figures. But her points are also transferrable to bloggers in general.

Here's number 2, concerning the environment of the internet and how this influences blogging:

"2) The real role the internet played in this was not the preservation of Naomi's comments, but the atmosphere that encouraged her to make them in the first place. The internet is public—extremely public—but it feels private. You're posting from home, with a glass of wine by your keyboard. You're shooting the breeze with your cyber-friends. The context is relaxed, the tone casual. So what if you let down your guard and tell a few people what you really think about your husband, co-worker, factional master? So what is—you don't know who you're telling. One of my correspondents told me of a mortifying incident when he trotted off to the pub with friends on a Friday night, and let loose about his work, boss, frustrations—only to discover one of his friend's new partners, there that evening, was a political reporter—who had just scored the scoop of the month. The internet is like that every day."

She ends her post cautioning readers to "think carefully".

Read her points, some of which she says are "not all mine", at Sisterhood and Solidarity.

Image: Dead 2.0