A Question for the Blogosphere
May 21st, 2007I recently caught a glimpse of a topic on a blogging forum about whether people “are themselves” when they blog. It’s an interesting topic to think about - even those of us who blog under our own name don’t necessarily blog “as ourselves.” For example, I consider a post like this to be the real me: I talk this way in person, I talk about this type of topic… I try to blog as though I’m having a regular conversation with the reader. But at the same time, this isn’t a soapbox from which I can be completely, utterly honest. There are a lot of topics I’d like to blog about, but can’t for the simple reason that I don’t want everyone to know every detail of my life (especially considering that half of my family reads this thing…). Honestly, I find this a rather disturbing form of self-censorship.
Other bloggers don’t even write under their own names - they create an alias under which they can talk about whatever they want. Some do this to avoid the repercussions of someone they know finding their blog, others do so to avoid the sheer embarrassment they’d encounter writing about certain things. But whenever a bloggers goes anonymous, they’re suddenly able to blog about anything they wish, and thereby writing some of the most interesting posts.
So here’s my question to you about anonymous vs. signatured bloggers: which group is more honest?
