LETTER: Anonymous online postings are a shame

From Phil Drietz
Delhi, Minn.
Back in May, I tried out for the first time, doing a rebuttal to a letter to editor (not this newspaper) using one of those on-line “Comments” postings that so many newspapers are now offering. They give you the option of going anonymous, so I did. But since then, I have been having serious reservations as to the honorableness of this “anonymous” approach after seeing so many blatant cases of just plain name calling without offering any kind of constructive argument.

Last week I finally decided to phone call the editors and/or publishers of six southern Minnesota newspapers, plus an editor in West Virginia who works for a company that owns many newspapers in our state. I posed this question: “You require full name and town to be published by those who turn in letters to the Editor; why do you not require the same thing for those who turn in letters to the online ‘Comments’ section? Why do you let them go anonymous?”

The answer I got was usually vague, like “We are treading on new ground, and we’re not sure about it.” Some just said they did not really know and they’re just following orders. Some also alluded to taking a loss in readership if they require full name and town.

Then I decided to check out the Mankato Free Press online for the first time, just to see what they do for the comments section. What was in the Nov 13 headlines? “Forum shut down after users go too far.”

In an ideal environment the anonymous approach seems like a good idea for helping those who are little shy about stepping out into the limelight with their ideas. But at the same time, it also invites frustrated cowards who cannot formulate a constructive argument and so resort to plain old name calling or some other kind of threat. Our newspapers need to face this fact of life head on and do the honorable thing: require publication of full name and town from all contributors.