Recently, an anonymous blogger in Alaska was “outed” by a state politician. His rationale was that AK Muckraker lacked the right to exercise free speech while retaining anonymity and privacy. I discovered AK Muckraker’s Mudflats blog last August as I was trying to learn more about John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate. Not only did I learn things about Governor Palin before they appeared in the mainstream media, but I discovered an entire global community. AKM’s readers engage in a lively but overwhelmingly civil discussion of politics, both Alaskan and national. Dissenting views are expressed, but the conversation is almost always at a higher level of civility than on many other political blogs I’ve read. AKM and Mudflats’ readers provide links to sources to back up their statements, allowing readers to delve more deeply into issues and in so doing become better informed voters and citizens.
AKM’s biggest contribution to the discussion is to hold politicians accountable by pointing out where actions and words diverge. When AKM used Mike Doogan’s own words as a sort of “macaca moment,” he took umbrage. Why Doogan, an elected state legislator and former journalist, would take the step of revealing a blogger’s identity with an official communique to his constituents, ignoring the long and important history of anonymous political expression in this country, says more about him than it does about AKM. (It should be noted that Tom Paine’s Common Sense and The Federalist Papers were both initially published anonymously.) As a public figure, Doogan is fair game for citicism. He chose his public role. AKM, on the other hand, is not a public figure but rather a single, albeit effective, voice who chose to remain a private figure. Political speech, including private or anonymous political speech, is constitutionally protected in this country. Rep. Doogan, as a politician AND a journalist, should be well aware of that fact.
Because there is a direct line between Mudflats and why I began blogging, I feel compelled to respond. Let me begin by explaining how I see my role. I was trained as a historian and an educator. Therefore, I see my role in large part as providing background and context to the events I write about. As a historian, I understand that one’s biases or philosophy of history shape how we view events, but while a narrative can be shaped by one’s views, it should not ignore contrary facts. Facts are what give weight to a theory — whether in science, in economics, or in history. My biases and my opinions are shaped by a combination of my education and my life experiences. That is why I outlined my biases in my About page, knowing that they would necessarily creep into my writing. I make no claim to being a journalist, citizen or otherwise.
I welcome contrary views in the comments on this blog — so long as they are civil. But I will take issue with views that are not informed by facts or where there are logical inconsistencies in them. I don’t expect that people are entirely logically consistent in their opinions, only that they are aware of such inconsistencies.
A functioning democracy is dependent upon citizens knowing what their government does. Indeed, news organizations have been called the fourth estate. There are several converging trends that are worrisome. Some are benign or neutral, others not. Some are related, others not. And these trends have begun so slowly that we are like a frog in a pot of water — unaware that the temperature is rising until it is too late to escape.
Each of these trends is worthy of its own post, so for openers, here’s a list. The key question for me in each of these trends is its effect on journalistic independence and whether the resulting “news” can be trusted.
- Melding news with entertainment
- Media consolidation
- New media forms and sources
- The 24-hour news cycle
- Journalism redefined?
- Economic issues
- Time for a new business model?
It will take a few days for my thoughts to congeal sufficiently to address each one, but bear with me. And if you see additional trends that are affecting contemporary journalism and that warrant a separate discussion, feel free to suggest them. That’s how a conversation begins.
This post is awesome, nice work!