New Rule: You Can't Have It Both Ways

The SecondLifeHerald has an interesting piece, 'Op/Ed: RL Press Needs to Respect SL Identities'. The short answer is - you can't have it both ways.

The long answer is you can't be anonymous and famous at the same time. It simply doesn't work. There are lines that have to be drawn, but for news to be... news... there has to be accountability, and it has to start with the person providing the information. In an age where identity theft is possible, anyone can toss out some 'news' under an assumed name (in fact, it seems, many do). The plausibility of a place that publishes anything that is pawned off as news is at stake with every single story. One bad story can unmake anyone who publishes news.

Web anonymity is nothing new; I support it. And I do support anonymous sources - but anonymous sources are only really used to gain direction to plausible, concrete information. Quoting an anonymous source as fact is always suspect. Saying an anonymous source has made hints and allegations is fine, saying that the anonymous source has sworn on The Holy Prim does not make it factual.

In a twist on that Op/Ed, I'll offer that SL Press needs to respect RL people. Lately, it's been jumping up and down on that line, and has accidentally crossed it at least once that I know of. Retractions are fine, but too many and people just stop reading and wait for the retractions.

The crux of the matter is that if you want SecondLife plausibility, SL names are fine. If you want real world plausibility - which (quoting the Op/Ed) 'Johnny-come-lately Reuters' does - you need accountability. While the SL Herald claims that it is "reputable press", it's reputability - which I will not state an opinion on - is based only in SL.

Reuters reputability, however, is international. Reuters has been around since the 1840s, and has been a reliable news source for... oh... 166 years, give or take a few months. Anyone who has been in the publishing industry knows how difficult it is to maintain a solid reputation, and that reputation has to be above reproach. It has to stand up to international laws as well - and because of that, certain mechanisms have been put into place that have evolved. Will they evolve to handle a virtual world? If they do so - not that much. Why? Because international laws and the rights of other people are at stake. Anonymous (and even imaginary) sources can easily take potshots at real world people and companies, slandering, libeling, defaming - and just plain outright lieing.

The bottom line is that your stories are only as reputable as the people behind them. If you want to write SL stories, do so with SL names - no problem. But if you want to reach a wider audience, the reputability level of a real life publication has to be met. And that is just the way it is.

This reputability is a double edged sword. Sometimes people who are afraid for their lives call for help anonymously, and sometimes it is real. Sometimes people die.

If you're a SecondLife resident and your life is in danger because of something you did in SecondLife, I feel for you. I really do. But I don't think I've seen that happen yet. I'm sure I'll read about it from a reputable news source if it does.