Annapolis Capital Punishment

I begin this post by thanking all of you who have written comments and identified yourselves. I want to thank Ellis, Scott, John, Stanford, Jeffrey, Will, Andrew, Bob and the many others (I apologize if I left you out of the list) who have and who I hope will continue to write in signed comments. I must also add that there have been many articulate and intelligent commenters who still wish to maintain their anonymity. I appreciate your comments but from now on, you'll have to identify yourselves.

And now, why I am now banning anonymous comments:

For two years I have published this blog, striving to create a meaningful forum for improving our local governance and community. On an almost daily basis, I post articles, some of consequence, some less serious, on topics of concern to local readers. I am a thorn in the side of elected officials who misuse their office or violate the public trust. I want people to be informed, interested and involved. I welcome guest editorials and guest comments, but I have many concerns about anonymous comments.

All along I have allowed anonymous posters to make comments. That will no longer be the case. This is not something I take lightly. Readers know I have never been comfortable with this kind of anonymity and I have discussed this with many of you, either through online postings or in private conversation. There are pros and cons to allowing anonymous comments, but I have increasingly been receiving more and more irritating, bothersome, irresponsible and offensive comments. I see no reason to believe this trend will stop anytime soon, especially with local election campaigning getting underway.

Having said that, I want you to know that of the many hundreds of comments I have received, I have chosen not to publish fewer than a dozen.

Admittedly, there may be a time and place for anonymity and pseudonyms and both were employed during the American Revolution and the early days of our nation. But back then, printing took a press, a lot of time and special skills and of course work to do this and distribute literature. Many could not read or write. And there was a revolution against tyranny going on and there might be consequences for those who spoke out. How many readers know of the Alien and Sedition Act passed after the revolution? Such situations of fear of expressing oneself certainly exist today in many places and even here in the USA, there can be repercussions if one speaks out about certain issues. Journalists all over the world are targets for the enemies of freedom and freedom of expression. But even with a heightened fear of foreign and domestic terrorism, of enemies or subversives, of a pernicious Patriot Act, there is still something different, or so I continue to believe about freedom of expression in the USA.

Each time I write, you know and everyone knows that it is I and I alone who maintain editorial responsibility, whose labors create this blog, whose name and reputation is at stake each and every time I hit the "Publish Post" key and make my thoughts, analysis and opinions known to all my readers--and potentially to anyone ]with access to a computer and the internet. That's the first thing to keep in mind. I make this blog. I write it. I maintain it. Not you. Not anybody else.

I take the enormous time and energy and provide the personal commitment to make this possible each and every day (and thanks to Google too of course!). And again, with my name. I take great risk in doing so. I have called upon the mayor to resign. I have called upon the former police chief to resign. I broke the story about our city attorney having been disbarred. I have posed questions about people in power and tried to speak truth to power. I take all the risks for doing so and the risks are real and not imagined.

Yet what does an anonymous poster risk? Nothing. The anonymous poster takes what I have labored to create as a public service with no expectation of material gain, and at great risk and uses this forum to post his or her personal gripe, opinion or rant. Sometimes these posters even take me to task and I allow them! Yes, I allow them to give it to me on the chin while they remain safe and....anonymous. And it gets worse. Some of them feel they are entitled to post anonymously and that I should publish anything they write. Think about it. I am supposed to give them the opportunity to offend and insult me as if it is their right! Some have even gone so far as to accuse me of censorship if I don't publish their posts!

I am a big believer in the sanctity of our First Amendment but freedom of speech is not absolute. As Justice Holmes famously said, it does not give us the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. The courts have established restrictions upon free speech recognizing that sometimes it is necessary to protect the greater rights of the many by limiting the rights of the few to say whatever they want, whenever they want. Yet the fundamental tenets and force of our right to free speech remain essentially intact.

Why then do so many choose to misuse this freedom by writing anonymously? Why do they think they deserve to say whatever they wish without any responsibility to the truth or accountability to others? And if they believe they can do that, why in this day and age where anyone can create a blog for free, do they believe they can tell me what to put on this blog where I publish with my name without them revealing who they are? I find this astonishing and while I have allowed it, I now say "no more."

Not only do these anonymous posters dilute the authority of free speech, they often are reckless, abusive, offensive, malicious and damaging. I could possibly find myself in serious legal trouble if I published a comment that might be deemed actionable for libel--even if I did not write it.

In the last few days, following my post about Councilman Josh Cohen saying he will run for mayor and my post where I reviewed a new restaurant, I received a string of obnoxious and exasperating comments which I believe are merely a signal about what else may be coming in this election year. One commenter asked how much I got paid for writing the restaurant review and called me a sellout! A sellout! Here I am writing day in and day out for free so this commenter and everyone else can read what I write and I write one restaurant review and get called a sellout! A sellout for what and by whom? Did I violate some trust or abuse somebody? Was my review dishonest or false? It's my blog and if I want to say that McDonald's burgers are better than Wendy's, who is that commenter to accuse me of anything?

As for Josh Cohen, I immediately received a bunch of emails that basically said "Yea Josh. Josh is great. Josh will win" and a bunch of emails questioning everything about his intentions. Imagine where this could be going over the next few months. Josh-lovers and Josh-haters could be sending me dozens or hundreds of emails, unsigned and anonymous and demanding that I furnish the forum to air their personal viewpoints. And who is to say that it's not just one or perhaps two people writing such letters? It could even be the candidate or the opponent for all we know.

If you want to voice your opinion, go ahead. But you'll have to identify yourself.

The funny thing here is that Josh Cohen and everyone else running for or serving in office is putting themselves out in public for everyone to see and to judge. They can't be anonymous. They are on the line for criticism and personal attack all the time. Yet the anonymous people think they have some kind of God-given and protected right to say whatever they may wish about public figures in an anonymous manner and with no responsibility or accountability! This is unacceptable.

Do these phonies even know that they already have special protection under the law to criticize public figures? That's right--it's a 1964 Supreme Court ruling known as New York Times versus Sullivan. It makes the libel standard even harder to prove when the subject is a public figure, i.e. an elected official. In other words, our system effectively says that in order to function as and ensure democratic government, you and I can say almost anything we want about a public figure and it is protected speech! But it is not an absolute. I am not going into a detailed explanation. You can look it up, but the point is that even though you have wide latitude to attack and criticize a public figure, and truth is always an absolute defense in libel, it does not mean you can knowingly lie, act with malice or damage someone BUT WITH ALL THIS PROTECTION WHY WOULD ANYONE REMAIN ANONYMOUS? What are they worried about? And if I can write this stuff everyday and take on this risk, why should I provide a free forum to others who will not do the same?

Having said all this, consider the bizarre "reasoning" of a recent comment I received:

The reason you don't like anonymous posters is because you are forced to respond to the message and not attack the messenger.

The ironic and illogical nature of this comment left me almost dazed. I have tried to respond to the bizarre, hostile, negative and abusive comments with humor and sarcasm--and even that has brought me negative responses. So, the bottom line is THERE WILL BE NO MORE ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.

If you don't like it, start your own blog. You've had your chance to send in anonymous comments for two years. It's over. Now start acting responsibly and with accountability and work with me to build community, not tear it down.

If an opinion is valued by the writer, and if it is worth my time to read and value it, why should we not know who wrote it?

Finally, if you truly have something of great import where signing your name would subject you to danger or risk of repercussion, you know how to reach me. I'll protect your anonymity. But you'll have to make yourself known to me. That's just the risk you'll have to take.


Please send comments, subscribe, share with your friends, and support our sponsors. Join us at Ahh Coffee! in Eastport almost every Thursday from 8-9 am.