Conor Friedersdorf

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@ericowensdc I agree there is no "right" to anonymity. But no one can explain why *the name* is newsworthy, assuming you've already told readers the other details about the person. I've heard *she doesn't deserve anonymity." Maybe. But is there value added to the name? I don't see it. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

If you think the anonymity question w/r/t Libs of TikTok is uncomplicated––that the name itself is *obviously* newsworthy––would you feel the same about a large follower, influential account that posted mocking videos of cops, some misbehaving, some out-of-context unfair gotchas? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@bendreyfuss It seems obvious to me that an article about this person is newsworthy, and much less clear that their specific name is newsworthy. If you had the same article with *Libs of Tik Tok creator* instead of the name would it lose anything important? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@bsdtectr You're right, thanks for pointing that out! — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

Ah that makes more sense, going to delete the last Tweet now that I read it that way — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration. Madison was 36 when he wrote much of the Constitution and the Federalist Papers. And now, even as Dianne Feinstein remains a sitting United States Senator, people think the problem is that 35 is too young to be a judge? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@ijbailey @AshurShahana @jbarro I think the Internet age has changed various things that call for an update but yes, Taylor is absolutely applying the longstanding industry standard here, not an anomalous one, and everyone should understand that. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@ijbailey She'll get both extreme targeted support and extreme targeted harassment. Her influence will probably increase. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@ijbailey @AshurShahana @jbarro The Scott Alexander case was the one that especially bothered me. Knowing his name was against the public interest — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@ijbailey @AshurShahana @jbarro I agree. I think the longstanding rule is wrong in the case of pseudonymous authors--that the default should be against outing them, and that overcoming that default should require a showing that the identity adds some substantive information of relevance. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@mo_sabet @WhatTheHanson By signing rather than vetoing a law that stripped their appelate jurisdiction. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@ijbailey @jbarro You all keep asserting that without giving any reasons for why. And it isn't even a consistent standard. News organizations grant anonymity all the time to people far more influential than whoever runs Libs of Tik Tok. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@mo_sabet Judges aren't the ultimate arbiter in this case. Congress could pass a law mandating masks on flights. But they haven't and won't as they don't have the votes — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@Analytictheist @danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro Yes I noticed that too. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

If you don't think the judiciary should check the other two branches of the federal government what do you think its function is? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro I sort of agree, but begin to doubt this formulation when the harm in question is *has politics I judge to be bad* or *mocks causes to which I am sympathetic*, a standard I try to apply regardless of my politics or sympathies in a given matter. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro The remedy I would propose for this is viewpoint neutral standards — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro I think these kinds of controversies upset so many people because they feel that journalists are outing people to punish them for having what journalists regard as bad politics, and that this perception harms rather than helps the credibility of journalism — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@jason_a_w @danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro The strongest appeal in my view would be to the general benefits of a *don't out pseudonymous authors* norm and the real costs of undermining that norm, especially for punitive reasons — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro suits our interests. And it seems to me that we should also be willing to have anonymous subjects sometimes when they have an interest in privacy and there is no substantive matter their name helps to convey — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro I think you are getting closer to the mark. On one side, we have a person's interest in their privacy, and on the other side, we have the interest of journalistic institutions of being trusted. But in lots of cases we are happy to use anonymous sources when it — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro If you know a pro choice person but the lottery and this allowed them to give lots of money to planned Parenthood, what does their name add? If you reported all that to your readers, why would the name of the lottery winner be of additional value? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro Why? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@jason_a_w @danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro So in your view the name should be known so that people who find the account odious can castigate the individual behind it by name or otherwise punish her? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @jason_a_w @RyanRadia @jbarro It depends. If she is a lottery winner who happens to be pro choice and gives millions to Planned Parenthood, or pro life and gives to its adopt kids analog, that seems like I don't need a name. If she js a CEO who gives to lawmakers who benefit her business, absolutely. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@jason_a_w @danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro What is the public interest in doing so? If it's so clear just articulate it. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro @jason_a_w Okay, maybe interesting. maybe even offers insight, if there's a relationship to the work, but I still don't see the case for naming the hospice nurse as opposed to reporting that it is a hospice nurse. — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro @jason_a_w Also "feels weak" still wins compared to the zero interests you've articulated on the other side. What are they in the hospice nurse case? — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro @jason_a_w How about *the ability to write pseudonymously results in some value to the public that we wouldn't get without it and insofar as you undermine the ability to do that you impose a public cost* — PolitiTweet.org

Conor Friedersdorf @conor64

@danielwinlander @RyanRadia @jbarro @jason_a_w I may or may not think any given reveal was the right call but I'm baffled by the notion that no accounting is required on the *reveal* side of the ledger to outweigh the interests on the other side — PolitiTweet.org