« A different kind of Trifecta | Main | Takin' it to the Streets »
The Anonymity Question
Jeremy Blachman has some good thoughts on anonymity vs. full disclosure for law students who blog. This is percolating elsewhere, as well. For example, Undeniable Dilemma is a new-to-me blog by another soon-to-be-One-L who wonders, why all the secrecy?. What I wonder is if an undeniable dilemma is anything like an ambivalent imbroglio... I'll have to read more to find out.
The more I think about it, the more difficult it is for me to understand how anonymity can even be a real question for bloggers. Does anyone really think they can keep their identity secret? It seems to me that the only way to do so would be to make your posts so abstract and general as to be nearly empty of real content, and if you did that, what's the point of having a blog in the first place? ai is about as anonymous as it can get, which is to say, not very. My thinking is that casual readers don't really care about who I am; knowing my name or my measurements or my place of birth (which I think I've blogged about before) or whatever would not really be meaningful to the average reader. Therefore, none of that information is on this site (although I'm sure it's discoverable to those who really wish to find it). But anyone who knows me in "real" life (aka, meatspace) can easily put two and two together to connect me with ai, and that's fine. I've always tried to stick to the maxim that I'll only write things that I wouldn't mind saying in public, or to the people directly concerned. If I'd be embarrassed or ashamed if people connected me with the things I say, I shouldn't say them at all.Those are the rules I'll continue to try to live by, so if you happen to see me at GW this fall, please say hello—I'll be the guy with the iBook.*
Elsewhere in law school discussion, Unlearned Hand thoughts on the ongoing debate about computers in the law classroom have generated healthy comment thread.
And on the subject of computers in the classroom, I think this blog is evidence that American University's Washington College of Law is pretty Mac-friendly—its author is the Mac specialist in the law school's computer lab. Rank better mean *something,* is all I can say.
* Full Disclosure: Due to GW's draconian computer policy (i.e.: "Buy the Dell laptop we recommend or you just may burn in hell forever and flunk out of law school in the first week."), I imagine I'll be one of the few using an iBook at all. However, I won't have it everyday; since GW uses Windows-only software for its legal writing course and for exams, I'll be carrying an old Dell on days when I know I'll be needing to run that software.
Posted August 4, 2003 01:32 PM | law school meta-blogging
I'll be joining you as an Apple User at GW, although I will be on my lovely new 15" TiBook instead of an ibook. I figure we only need a PC for the Legal Writing class, so thats the only time I intend to use one. And with the added bonus that Airport Cards work on LEAP networks (not sure if you figured that out yet), there really is no need for a PC. I just bought a used laptop that I can use for legal writing and tests, and I'm hoping it makes me through the three years. This whole computer thing has pissed me off quite a bit, and I've been meaning to blog about it, it should end up soon on my blog. Anyways, if you see a kid sitting around with a Tibook, it's most likely me, come say hi!
Posted by: matt at August 4, 2003 07:08 PM
I think young blawggers, if they have serious ambitions, have to choose between full disclosure of their identity or full disclosure of their ideas.
For example, a friend who blogs recently e-mailed me blasting a Supreme Court decision. When I asked if I could use his e-mail as the basis for a post, he said that was fine but not to attribute it to him or link to his blog.
He didn't want to do anything to hurt his chances of working for the justices whom he was shredding.
His own blog has opinions, but it mostly stays away from criticizing anyone whom he has the remotest chance of being employed by in the future.
Unlearned Hand (one of the anonymous) puts all his opinions right out there, but I think he would be a little more cautious if we all knew who he was.
Posted by: PG at August 5, 2003 09:06 AM
Matt: I look forward to meeting you, although you better lock up that Ti-book or I just might have to steal it. My trusty iBook's 600 Mhz have performed well for close to two years, but they seem to be getting a little slower as the days go by.
PG: I see what you're saying, but I wonder: Would your friend really even want to work for those justices he was shredding? Some say any clerkship is a good clerkship, but wouldn't it be pretty difficult to work for a justice with whom you vehemently disagree? Also, just tangentially, I've heard that Scalia, for example, always tries to make sure he hires at least one clerk who disagrees with him on everything, so in that case, an outspoken blogger might have a leg up on the competition.
The example of Unlearned Hand is a good one, because while you're right that he puts his ideas right out there, I think he's kidding himself if he thinks he's totally anonymous. (And I have no idea if he does think that.) For example, he's listed the courses he's taking this fall and the firms he plans to interview with. Anyone in his courses or at those firms could quickly find him via Google, and then other things he's said would likely make him identifiable to those people. Maybe not, and maybe those readers would have to work really hard to connect the dots between the blog and the blogger, but it seems to me more likely than not that eventually, if Unlearned Hand continues to blog, he will be unable to hide his identity.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I feel it's safer to assume your identity is known or will be known at some point in the future, and to keep that in mind as you post. That seems the best way to stay out of trouble. If that means you think twice about what you write, that's probably for the best.
But really I'm pretty ambivalent about the anonymity thing. I like the fact that my blog doesn't show up if you google my real name, but I'd also like to think I can stand by anything I've said if anyone learns it's really me saying it.
Posted by: ambimb at August 5, 2003 09:41 AM
The ladies over at open and notorious just had a "do not talk about fight club" discussion. Some people from their class found the blog, and they don't want everyone in the school administration finding it next.
Posted by: falconred at August 5, 2003 11:18 AM
My law school newspaper has already written a story on me (with my cooperation), so it's no secret here. What it does provide is an extra layer of privacy, so that anyone who wants to know who I am has to try harder to find out.
I used to have an eponymous website, but I found it too vain... and now I love my pseudonym too much to give it up. ;-)
Posted by: Unlearned Hand at August 5, 2003 02:02 PM
I think my friend just disagreed with two moderate conservative jurists on their reasoning in this particular case, so I don't think he's hypocritical or anything for wanting to keep his options open. There have been enough blawggers going down lately that caution doesn't seem like a bad policy for someone thinking about his current/future employment.
I'm not very anonymous myself, nor do I stress about it (I've linked to material that had my name, etc.), but I suppose I prefer dealing with strangers with some layer of privacy, as UH puts it.
Posted by: PG at August 5, 2003 05:01 PM
yeah we killed the site - some of us were busted. honestly, we didn't care who had been reading it, as long as our identities were kept secret. unfortunately, some people went sleuthing, and well... doh. our blog was especially honest and often harsh, with nasty things being said about the administration, so anonymity was necessary. we wanted to be honest and personal and to paint the entire picture of the law school experience rather than just generalized suffering. but with our identities being spread around, we had to censor ourselves to avoid repurcussions. finally, we were like... forget it. it isn't worth it. it sucks, but the real world isn't kind to "free expression." i've had too many friends (three) fired over personal websites, and it just isn't worth the risk. anyhow, yeah, this blows.
Posted by: learned foot at August 6, 2003 12:30 PM
Learned Foot: What a shame! That really does blow! Good luck as you all move on to whatever's next.
Posted by: ambimb at August 6, 2003 01:32 PM
