This post is inspired by a number of recent additions to the travel blogging arena - but I hope it will trigger a wider debate about blogging.
A few months ago a rather witty new blog appeared on the radar - joeblogs.net.
It was rather funny in places (even suggesting I should appear on a Celebrity Travel version of Big Brother), although it seems that it has since decided to stick to straight commentary pieces on industry news rather than poke fun.
Curiosity often killed the cat but always inspires the journalist, so with some help I found out who was the owner and confronted them. The person asked us not to 'out' them.
NB: There was a lot of debate behind the scenes, believe me.
[He has since come clean]
I'm not a great fan of anonymous blogging - perhaps this is the journalist in me who is trained to look for transparency and openness in information.
This is especially relevant if and when there are conflicts of interest or criticism of companies.
Anyway, not actually gaining anything from exposing Joe Blogs, we decided to sit tight.
Fast forward to last week and Travel Jerk appears in the blogosphere, running under the strapline:
"Saying things about travel that prolly ain't true... coz i'm a jerk!"
It's second post (which may well be deleted pretty soon) was about Thomson and it's apparent dislike of people of a certain size, primarily because these people didn't feature in its latest TV advert.
Maybe I've lost my sense of humour recently but it wasn't particularly funny - especially as I think it was meant to be. Ah well...
Anyway, our attention was also drawn to a poll it ran at the top of the homepage, asking which trade industry magazine, TTG, Travel Weekly, Travolution or Selling Long Haul, "makes the best toilet paper?".
Okay, well done, so now you've grabbed my attention - primarily because I don't want a blog to say - humorously or not - that Travolution is only worth existing as a device for, well, you know...
Sense of humour failure again, perhaps? Probably...
A bit homework, once again, and we've discovered who is the owner of the blog.
The grab below is from the WHOIS database for traveljerk.co.uk, not the Blogspot site which currently contains the content.
It was worth putting two and two together and hoping we get four, especially as they were registered-created almost simultaneously.
[Interestingly, the registrant name was changed within minutes of our initial contact with the owner this morning]
Anyway, our suspicions were confirmed in an email I received from Travel Jerk today, asking us not to take it any further action.
[Jerk said it wanted to be Holy Moly for the travel industry]
Now revenge can be quite sweet and outing Travel Jerk would probably be an obvious thing to do (we may still do it).
But for the time being, instead, I think there are some more interesting questions that should be debated.
* Is anonymous blogging an acceptable form of publishing?
* Can it only be taken seriously, ironically, if it is funny or satirical?
* How open should a blog be (especially in terms of conflicts, even if it is anonymous)?
* Should a site like Travolution be 'outing' anonymous bloggers if it finds them?
I apologise to Travel Jerk for the attention you are about to receive - you've just triggered what is actually quite an interesting debate.
UPDATE: Travel Jerk is no longer. Site and Twitter account deleted.
If you feel you have something useful to say, then say it and take responsibility for your comments. In my experience, people tend to feel empowered to say the most ridiculous things when they feel they can hide behind the shield of anonymity. That shield, however, obscures transparency and openness and brings into question the credibility and reliability of the source. So, post anonymously if you want, just don't expect anyone to take you seriously.
Oh, and if you write anything libelous, don't expect your shield to protect you against a lawsuit, because it won't. As you have demonstrated, the Internet is a far from anonymous medium of communication.
I wouldn't book a villa or a rental car from any company that was actively supporting anonymous blogging. I wouldn't book a flight, hotel or tour either..... but thats a moot discussion.
In particular I am concerned with any anonymous blogging that was not in compliance with Section 22 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive
More info
http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/bloggers-not-protected-by-anti-astroturfing-laws-502794
Like a Ryanair "outrageous" statement for PR motives, the best thing to do with an anonymous blog is ignore it.
As a fan of Fake Steve Jobs when he was alive, I would accept the second criteria, i.e. funny or satirical which has a long tradition in media, especially in the U.K.
That would eliminate the majority of the yokels who just are neither.
Anything else is cowards on the web, a wide spread phenomenon, a we all know so well and they should be outed whenever you can.
From my point of view, we set Joe up so that people could send us blogs and we could put them up for them in confidence (if they wanted) so that their work could be viewed by a larger audience. (we of course vet them) its quite hard getting people to read your work.
For example, the last 2 blogs including the exclusive interview with Mr Roe (which got our biggest amount of unique views) was not done by me.
However like Stephen states, without a face people will not take your blog seriously and without readers whats the point? which is why my profile appears on joe.
In a Ryanair style - we welcome anyone who wants us to post their blog to email us.
Great post. I was literally just about to start looking into this, and write a post, but up came the empty website and Twitter account. Then I searched their blogspot URL in google, and after my tweets saying what the hell is this, your post...
I thought it was idiotic to start a blog, and somehow manage to insult several publications before writing a single post.
Anyway, interesting post, and I think the answer is: what's the point of anonyminity?
I think you'll all appreciate John Gabriel's GID Theory...
normal person + anonymity + audience
I remember saying this about the joe blogs project, but it's simple: readers don't like anonymity, so if you're going to do it you have to do it for a reason - normally that it allows you to continue delivering inside information (if you're blogging about an industry you move in, e.g. Guido Fawkes) or be more open and confessional than you'd otherwise be (if you're blogging about your private life, e.g. Petite Anglaise).
Anonymous blogs should be engaged with if good, ignored if bad and outed if unethical. Travel Jerk didn't raise any ethical issues - or hadn't yet - and should have been ignored (unless of course you found it funny, which I'm ashamed to say a former TW hack I sent it to did). Joe Blogs did, as Alex points out, and you would've been right to out it.
Your first question: Is anonymous blogging an acceptable form of publishing?
Yes, why not? Especially if you live in a less democratic country where your views and opinions could get you incarcerated, tortured or killed.
Pop Bitch is anonymous and highly entertaining sometimes but it does require a sense of humour.
Agree with Garri on this -- a lot depending on the country you live in and the topic you're blogging on. Take politics in Thailand for example, being anonymous is close to essential in that case. Bangkok Pundit (bangkokpundit.blogspot.com/) is a perfect example -- it's arguably the #1 English language blog on Thai politics and if the author's identity was known, he'd be in jail or deported.
Depends on the topic!
I am, on the whole, not a fan of anonymous blogs, but rather perversely have been a fan of several anonymous blogs.
As Nathan suggested, it's very much a horses-for-course issue.
Anonymity is fine, even necessary if, say, you're writing about your life as a prostitute or are writing explicitly about your sex life - like Girl With A One-Track Mind, for example. But look at the lengths people went to to discover her identity.
Equally, if the blog's anonymity is something of a non-issue - you're not really hiding anything, you just don't want to make a big thing of your real identity, that's fine.
If you're merely hiding your identity so you can fling poop at people with impunity, then, well, FAIL. Newspapers have traditionally done that with gossip columns to help stop the publishing of certain stories destroying journalists' relationships with contacts. Out in the blogging world, that very lack of transparency can undermine you, rather than protect you.