Anony­mous com­ments lack ac­count­abil­ity

The Compass - - EDITORIAL -

Th­ese days peo­ple can just about say any­thing on the In­ter­net. They can even ter­ror­ize peo­ple they se­lect at ran­dom. Of­ten they post neg­a­tive, even slan­der­ous com­ments and they’re signed anony­mous.

Re­ac­tion to let­ters to the editor and fea­tures or weekly opin­ions by colum­nists are quite of­ten fol­lowed with com­ments where those re­act­ing sign fic­ti­tious names, or non de plumes.

Sign it.

I have al­ways made it a prac­tice to sign my full name. My creed is al­ways that if I got some­thing to say and if I be­lieve in it to stand by it openly.

I have no prob­lem with any­one post­ing a valid re­view or strong opin­ion. I look for them of­ten when I am on­line or read­ing my news­pa­per. Hon­est and open re­views of restau­rants or other pub­lic fa­cil­i­ties can some­times help me make up my mind on the ser­vice pro­vided.

How­ever, in my opin­ion there must be some ac­count­abil­ity. If you have a com­plaint or are not in agree­ment with a prod­uct or ser­vice or a let­ter to the editor or a colum­nist’s views — if you go pub­lic then post it but sign your full name.

Anony­mous must go in my view from this side of the bay. Let’s be ac­count­able.

Bill West­cott Bay Roberts

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.