Since you asked…

Many Canadians are justifiably concerned about the reliability and veracity of information purveyed by mainstream media.

None of these concerns would be alleviated–indeed they’d likely be heightened–by the spread of anonymous writings by “Citizen Journalists.”

One concern about the mainstream media is the widespread practice of journalists granting anonymity to sources, thereby depriving the reader the opprtunity to assess the possibility of conflicts of interest, axes being ground, etc.

At present, there’s a lively debate amongst mainstream journalists–stimulated by Slate’s Jack Schaffer–about when the public’s right to know must give way to a compelling interest in secrecy.

While there’s much to criticize in the mainstream press, I’d say this debate reflects ethical standards that should be the envy of bloggers who demand anonymity without offering any compelling interest as justification.

Anonymity is the operating standard of debate in a police state. In a democracy, absent a compelling justification, anonymity is for intellectual cowards and those with hidden agendas.

Norman Spector comment at E-Group Blogs Canada

Man. I totally disagree with Mr. Spector.
I’m hardly the only one. James Bow takes on the former Mulroney advisor, former ambassador, former Western Standard writer, current Globe and Mail opinion columnist. No doubt I’ve failed to list most of Mr. Spector’s accomplishments.

Jay Currie nailed it to:

It is the quality of the post which matters…and if someone is such a ninny as to think a racist/pornographic/libelous/nasty post will be protected by their anonymity they are likely not to know just how transparent the internet is to capable folks.