Figuring out how to best use new web page

I've been waiting for this opinion piece to appear on the web since I read it last week as I feel it is only appropriate to respond to this anonymously. There are a few reasons I feel this is the case.

First of all, news and opinions are two different things. I strongly believe that anything reported as news should adhere to journalistic standards of verifiable sources and accountability for reporting inaccurate or false information. It's the only way you can be assured that what you are reading is indeed factual; however, opinion, by its very definition, is not the same as news. An opinion is not a report of the facts but rather an individual's analysis of the facts that determines how he feels about the facts. I don't see how "credibility" applies when you write about how you feel about something. I personally believe that an opinion is a standalone entity that should be evaluated solely on the merit of thought contained within. Attaching one's name to an opinion can actually hinder the reader in objectively evaluating the opinion as the authorship of the opinion may overshadow the opinion itself. The identity of the author and the validity of thought contained in an opinion are unrelated. I feel the reader should be evaluating the opinion for its content, and an objective assessment of the thoughts contained in the opinion may be impossible if the reader knows the author. For example, a reader may agree or disagree with an opinion before they even read it based on who wrote it. It's like judging a book by its cover. That approach is obviously not an objective evaluation. I do believe that if information is presented as factual in an opinion, it should be verifiable information. That goes back to the whole news vs. opinion differences. As far as the proliferation of rumors, false information, etc., I would advise a reader to verify the information themselves if information presented as fact is suspect or questionable. I personally believe it is irresponsible for an individual to blindly accept everything he reads as being true.

Another reason I feel anonymity can be of value is the freedom to express one's views without fear of reprisal. This article mentioned "people who hide behind their computer screens". While this term is used in a negative connotation in this article, I don't feel that hiding behind a screen name is always such a bad thing when expressing an opinion. As I stated earlier, I do not agree with an anonymous source posting information as fact which may start rumors, but when expressing an opinion, anonymity can provide the opportunity for people to openly and honestly state their views without becoming the target of retaliation. In a small town, I feel that this is a very legitimate fear. I have often discovered that if your opinion is not synonymous with the perceived majority opinion (which here in Commerce is often assumed to be the right side of the issue simply because the majority said so) or the opinion of the segment of society holding the local balance of power, there will be consequences for openly expressing how you really feel about an issue. I like the ability to interject a viewpoint into a discussion without having to worry about who's going to be mad at me because of it. Also, I feel that this freedom allows the introduction of perspectives that would otherwise go unspoken due to the potential backlash. I don't believe this type of "accountability" is what is intended under traditional journalistic standards. I've heard some newspaper editors use the term "courage" when addressing the issue of signing your name to an opinion. In the social construct of a small town, I feel there is a fine line between courage and stupidity. I for one am not a masochistic glutton for punishment.

Finally, this article posed the question of "what does this contribute to the public good"? Based on another statement in this article, I feel that "letting people express [opinions] and giving readers the opportunity to see diverse opinions" is not a bad thing, but rather an untapped resource that can add value to the community. I am aware that such discussions can degenerate into the melee the editor is trying to avoid, but I choose to remain optimistic that readers can filter out the noise and glean the value that is presented in the viewpoints expressed. I feel that at times, the local media does not do an adequate job of presenting a comprehensive, balanced perspective of the issues in editorial content. As this article stated, journalists have had "greater access" to expressing opinions, and unfortunately I feel this may have hampered public perception when forming opinions. I feel that readers are better equipped to form their own viewpoints when they are presented with differing opinions. Opinions in contrast can help readers to think about a perspective they have not previously considered and to evaluate the viewpoints to which they currently adhere. It can help to eliminate a form, although probably unintentional, of thought control resulting from only having access to a narrow spectrum of views. To a certain extent, this has happened on a world and national levels through the popularity of blogs and message boards, but on the local level an environment such as this has not existed. It is my hope that this publication encourages the development of this medium and leaves it open to the public rather than trying to suppress the content contained in this forum by eliminating the anonymity privilege that currently exists.