Today's subject is all about blogging. It started when I read Daniel Henninger's column in the Wall Street Journal: Disinhibition Nation. The short version is simply Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. And O'Toole's commentary applies to Sturgeon as much as Murphy: Sturgeon was an optimist. But Mr. Henninger is right in my experience: people are far less inhibited on the internet than real life (or what they should be. Please, don't let it all hang out).
And now we turn to sockpuppets. Michael Hiltzik was caught employing sockpuppets by Patrick Frey, AKA Patterico, and had his LA Times blog suspended while the paper investigates. Of course, he's not the only person caught with his hands in a couple of socks: John Lott (AKA Mary Radosh) comes to mind. The lure of disinhibition is hard to resist for people who must maintain a certain decorum because we (that's an internet we, not a royal we) know who they are when what they'd really like is the freedom to let loose with their real feelings. What stands out about Mr. Hiltzick is his utter lack of class or shame when caught. Of course, Patterico is all over that sorry excuse of reasoning and ties it into the larger trend we see in the media - they lie every day and have no shame about it either.
So have I ever used a sockpuppet? No, I've always posted under my own name in blogs and on forums. Sometimes I've come late to a conversation and discovered another Kevin Murphy there, in which case I called my self Kevin "the other" Murphy. Isn't the true test of character what you do when you think nobody is looking? Sure it would be nice to anonymously blast people and say everything I think, but then isn't that a test on what and how you should say things? So I aways try to talk and write as if my name were attached, and the easiest way to do that is to actually attach my name. I understand that for certain people in certain situations that isn't possible, but I'm not in that kind of situation.
And yes, I think I have had a couple of commenters here use sock puppets based on IP addresses and quality of the remarks. I understand that IP address isn't enough alone because if you dial up into a large provider like AOL you get whatever IP address they have available. Will I out you? Hey this is my place, so if I think I should I will. Generally, I don't care.
Back to John Lott for a minute. His sock puppetry was exposed by an aussie named Tim Lambert who is obsessed with sockpuppetry, seeing them on the hand of anyone who disagrees with him. He may even have a couple of socks on his own hands.
I can actually see a valid reason for sockpuppets - if you want your ideas considered for themselves and not dissmiss or accepted because you are well known to the community. But in this case, I think when the dust settles it would be best to reveal your deception. Otherwise, it's just lying by another name, because you are trying to deceive people Unlike simply saying something inaccurate, the point of lying is deception.
Just remember, be careful out there.
