The Blog | Arianna Huffington: Setting the Record Straight: On Trolls, Moles, and Dis-Invited Bloggers | The Huffington Post

The Blog Arianna Huffington: Setting the Record Straight: On Trolls, Moles, and Dis-Invited Bloggers The Huffington Post It seems like eventually every site in cyberspace has the same to dilemmas to deal with -- transparency and censorship.

These issues seem especially important to any left-leaning citizens of cyberspace. Internet savvy lefties like to have things out in the open and censorship makes their skin crawl. We've seen it on forums and messageboards for years now. And now the issues have come up in one of the most high profile sites in the blogosphere.

Transparency means, sure, let the staff post, let anyone post -- but if there's a connection that puts their post in context it should be disclosed. For instance, even though it's very meaningless, I will disclose that Dr. Rost keeps his personal blog on the same service that this blog is kept. There's no other connection between me and any other party to this controversy, but the disclosure is there for anyone who feels that might have significance. Historically on the HuffPo site, disclosures are made about relationships between bloggers and subjects (this person wrote a blurb for my book, we went to college together, we met once at a panel discussion, etc.). The disclosure is made, the discussion moves on, and no one feels hoodwinked. It's simple and straightforward and had the HuffPo employ disclosed, there wouldn't be have the problem there is.

Censorship, on the other hand, is the tougher nut to crack, for several reasons. First, there's no 1st Amendment guarantees on the web. The owner of the website is free to be as hands-off or heavy-handed as he or she likes regarding what's posted. And owners can be as subjective as they like, allowing some people to post whatever they like while banning others for seemingly trivial infractions or for no apparent reason at all. However, for the left, censorship carries certain negative connotations -- most namely the silencing of dissenting voices be it in books, newspapers, public speaking, or any other forum. If a website is going to court liberal, progressive, reform-minded readers, than the owner needs to think two, three or more times before silencing any voice -- popular or unpopular with the readership.

I'm sure Ms. Huffington never envisioned the aggravations of blog ownership, of facing the choice of blocking access to someone she invited to post at her site, or facing the consternation of readers who felt duped by her decision to let her staff post without disclosure and offended by the dismissal of one of the tamer voices at her site. Those of us who have organized and have been a part of web communities have seen it all too often.

My bottom line on this -- if you are going to have a blog that purports to represent the left, then you need to make extra efforts to ensure transparency and even more prepared to take the heat from the few for letting someone with a different voice speak, than the heat from many for cutting that voice off.

An update: After a few days of reader ire, the Huffington Post has changed policy and will no longer allow staff members to post negative comments on guests blogs. Personally, I think a policy of allowing them to post provided they identify themselves as staff members would have been more equitably, but I imagine after the drubbing, they just want to be rid of the problem.