Outing an amateur

The decision to publish the name and workplace of the blogger Grog, author of Grog’s Gamut, by The Australian’s James Massola has been dominating not just conversation on twitter and on many Australian blogs, but has continued to generate pageviews for the national broadsheet. There’s a lot of back and forth about the ethics of unmasking an anonymous blogger, but I think a lot of it is talking at cross purposes because most of the journalists genuinely do not understand why a blogger would use a pseudonym and therefore begin with the attitude that there is something that needs to be uncovered.

The first thing that needs to be dispelled is that this is about anonymity. Like most bloggers who choose to use a pseudonym, as I originally did, Grog created a consistent persona that he presented via his blog and on twitter, which is nothing like the type of anonymous hit and run trolling that often shows up in comment threads. While the majority of his readers couldn’t tell you who Grog was there were a number who did know, including James Massola, so it’s fairly clear that he wasn’t actively trying to completely hide his identity. So then why use a pseudonym at all? I think that this is the key issue that many of the media professionals don’t understand and why so few of them have a problem with Massola’s decision to make Grog’s life a misery.

One of the reasons that so many bloggers choose to use a pseudonym is that when decide to start publishing their thoughts they have no idea what the consequences might be. Until you dive in you have no way of knowing whether your desire to start publishing will have an effect on your life, there’s no shortage of examples of people’s jobs being threatened or of people being stalked because they’ve written things online that someone disagrees with. When I began blogging my decision wasn’t about me wanting to avoid being held accountable for what I wrote, there were plenty of hints in my writing for people who may have known me in real life, but wanting to ensure that my wife, and especially my young children, wouldn’t end up being harassed by some random nutjob on the internet who’d taken a dislike to me. It was for this reason that the kids are always referred to by their nicknames, Buster Boy and the Troll Princess, and for a long time my wife Rach was simply known to my readers as Mrsdave.

There are plenty of other reasons for wanting to use a pseudonym too, it can be very difficult to discuss intensely personal topics openly if you have to operate under the assumption that someone could use it against you at a later date. For many people blogging provides one of the few outlets that they have to share their thoughts with other people in an open manner and it’s only by using a pseudonym that they can take advantage of this.

In Grog’s case it’s fairly obvious that he was using a pseudonym not so he could hide the fact that he was a public servant, in fact he referred to it more than once, but to ensure that the arguments that he made would not be used mischievously to undermine his professionalism as an impartial public servant. The things that Grog wrote about were all on the public record, which is in stark contrast to the journos who would deny him the ability to separate his professional and personal life, who regularly feel free to base their work on unnamed sources, so a pseudonym removes the angst of having to continually restate the boundaries between private opinion and professional life.

For a journalist this problem simply doesn’t exist, what they write is their professional life and the reality is that they strive for the chance to add their by-line to stories as it’s seen as a way of improving their professional capital. Journos are in some ways in an inverse reality to bloggers as they are rewarded for doing the type of writing that many bloggers fear they may be punished for, either professionally or socially. I think this is a big part of why so few of the journalists on twitter have had much sympathy for Grog and why they fail to understand the hostile reaction that so many people have had to this incident. I can’t imagine the anguish that Grog and his family must have felt when he found out that Massola was going to out him, even though he clearly believed that he was abiding by the APS code of conduct, how frightening must it have been to wonder whether or not this could end up with him costing his livelihood? This is something that most of the journalists do not seem to understand, or perhaps they simply do not care.

I eventually decided to blog under my own name when I began writing for Pure Poison because I figured that there was less chance of running into trouble compared to having people with nothing better to do spending their time trying to out me and pore over the details of my private life, however that was after more than two years of establishing this blog and getting a feel for what the consequences might be of using my own name. The critical thing is that I was able to make that decision at the time that suited me, as I’d seen Possum Comitatus and others do before me, which is completely different to having your details splashed across the pages of The Australian. Perhaps at some point Grog would have made the same decision, perhaps not, but it should have been his choice.

The excuse used by the Australian that Grog deserved to be exposed because he was influencing debate is pathetic, it was the strength of his argument that was making an impact, not who he was or what he does during business hours. It is telling that nowhere throughout this fiasco have the Australian engaged with any of Grog’s arguments, instead they have maliciously insinuated that he shouldn’t have the right to express himself because of his job as a public servant. The reality in this case is that pseudonyms provide the opportunity to speak truth to power and the traditional gate-keepers are unhappy. I think that there is also resentment coming from some of the professionals as they see amateurs and outsiders having more of an impact than they are in important circles.

If nothing else, most journos reaction to Grog being outed highlighted something that perhaps some of us had forgotten amongst all of the twitter banter over the last year and a half. Most professionals in the traditional media feel threatened by the emergence of new media contributors, they don’t see us as colleagues or as a resource to improve their own work but as competitors. They don’t understand why we want to contribute or why we chose to do so in the manner that we do, and they certainly don’t care if our participation ends up making our lives difficult. I think that the ABC’s Jonathan Green summed it up best

so folks just remember green’s golden rule of media: the journalist is not your friend.

Has it been that long?

I know that I’ve abandoned this blog for long stretches before, but that was usually because I didn’t want to write. This time it’s because I’ve been doing all of my wordy type stuff over at Pure Poison.

It’s been a real challenge trying to write regular content for Pure Poison, having fairly well defined subject matter is a double edged sword. What is gratifying is building a rapport with so many commenters on the blog, especially when something I’ve written completely surprises them. It’s nice to be unpredictable.

The down side to contributing to Pure Poison is that this little blog has become a quiet place. Hopefully I’ll get the balance a bit better soon.

Mrsdave joins the blogoshere

I know that many of you have been slavishly waiting for more of Mrsdave’s insights to be dripped across the pages of this blog. Sadly for me she knows that her star power far outshines mine and has decided to bypass me on the way to her own blog. Check out mrsdave.tumbler.com for snippets of stuff from the Dave from Albury compound that have grabbed Mrsdave’s attention.

Baptism of fire

After a few days waiting for the IT boffins at Crikey to upgrade my account so that I could begin contributing to Pure Poison, I managed to post there under my own name today.

I’d run through a few ideas for posts over the past couple of days, but I’d let all of them go because I had been unable to publish them. I figured that I’d avoid being too confrontational as I eased my way into the team, but as fate would have it at almost the exact same time that I got posting rights a post popped up in my RSS reader from News Limited Blogger Tim Blair that I simply couldn’t let pass without comment. For those of you who aren’t familiar with Mr Blair, he’s been a feature of the Australian blogosphere for quite a few years now and has previously crossed swords with some of the other authors at Pure Poison. Because of that history I have to admit that I wasn’t planning on raising my head above the parapet to soon, but I set timidity aside and made a contribution that I hoped would be appropriate.

It turns out that was the easy part.

Unlike Dave from Albury’s Weblog, with a modest audience and a collegial group of commenters, Pure Poison is read widely and comes under much more scrutiny. As such, rather than having a free flow of comments and ad hoc intervention, each and every comment needs to pass through a moderation queue. Making the judgement call about which comments are or are not OK to publish really isn’t something I’d given a great deal of thought to, but it’s an important part of the process. Thankfully my cohorts were available to give me direction, giving me a bit more confidence to wade into the moderation process, and at the end of day one I think I’ve managed OK.

The challenge now, as always, is what to write next.

More of the same, but different.

After a couple of guest posts at Pure Poison, Jeremy, Scott and Toby have asked me to join them there as a regular contributor. At first I was concerned that it might impact negatively on my blogging here, but when they pointed out that Pure Poison’s readers probably weren’t interested in stories about funny stuff my kids had done, I realised that there was probably scope to spread myself around.

Continue reading “More of the same, but different.”

I need to be moderated

After seeing Catch the fire ministry’s horrendous response to the Black Saturday fires I decided to add their news feed to my RSS reader. It’s rare that I pay much attention to it, rarer still that I read a whole article, but I couldn’t help but take a look at an article that they released the other day discussing the health care debate in the USA.

Continue reading “I need to be moderated”


It is often claimed by some esteemed commentators that the biggest failing of teh Left is their propensity for groupthink. How else could you explain the fact that those of us on this side of the ideological fence are so often in agreement with one another, and indeed so often in disagreement with the vessels of truth on the right?

Naturally, the charge of groupthink is one that we vigourously deny. We are quick to point out that we are often in fierce disagreement over exactly what percentage of the beans in our lattes need to come from organic fair trade sources, how many minority groups need to be invited to a dinner party before it can proceed and what cultural icons of the right we should try to defile.

Sadly, however hard we try to divert attention from the truth that we all receive daily instructions from Al Gore coincidental similarities that we share, we cannot hide what everybody knows. Not only do Leftists all think the same, we’re even all starting to look the same.

Continue reading “Doppelganger”

Blogwars 2.0

John Hartigan set off a flurry of comment this week when he took the opportunity to rubbish News Ltd’s competitors during his address to the National Press Club. There were sledges at Crikey, complaints about people stealing News’ valuable content and it led to a bunch of barbs thrown back and forth on websites, blogs and twitter.

Let’s put aside for a second the fact that any website on the planet can easily stop google from accessing their content, which News has chosen not to do, and compare for a second News’ words and actions.

Continue reading “Blogwars 2.0”