A Time for Change

Mike “really scary” Doogan – The Worst Person In Alaska (other than Sarah Palin)

Oh, lawdy, there they go again.  Those Alaskan elected officials are out of control!  An elected politician, Mike Doogan, has “outed” one of my very favorite bloggers.  What you say?  Yeah, an e l e c t e d   o f f i c i a l.   Maybe they have so much time on their hands up there that they have nothing better to do. Or maybe it’s far more insidious than that. Maybe certain Alaskan elected officials think that this country is still like the Wild West and that they are not held to the same standards that everyone else seems to be able to have.

So who is this Mike Doogan and why should you be interested in him.  Here’s why. He took it upon himself to “out” anonymous blogger, AKMuckraker of The Mudflats, who has strong progressive political views in a largely red state. If it happened to AKMuckraker, it could happen to you and every other anonymous blogger on the internet.  Moreover, he used his resources as an elected public official to “out” AKMuckraker who had been somewhat critical of rude emails he had sent to his constituents. After he learned of the blogger’s identity, he used his official newsletter to proudle announce his dirty work. 

 According to The Mudflats, the genesis of this sad comment on Alaskan “gotcha” goes like this:

… sometimes politicians don’t like people who express their opinions, especially when the opinion is less than flattering, and especially when it’s their own words that come back to bite them.  Mudflatters may recall back in December when Rep. Mike Doogan really got under my skin.  I had posted previously about Mr. Doogan by posting his reaction to the Palin nomination, promoting his appearance on a local radio show, and talking about the certainty of his reelection.  But I don’t always agree with him. The post where I took him to task was entitled  “Are You People Nuts? Lessons in Email Etiquette.”

The jist of it all, is that being really rude to people via email does not make them like you, nor does it make you look good.  And legislators have a certain vested interest in looking good.  Taking the high road when you’re an elected leader is always a good plan, because flying off the handle, or mouthing off at people and insulting them results in the dreaded….bad press, and bad public opinion.  Neither of those things helps the political goals of being liked, and being  reelected.

But here’s where it gets interesting.  After the initial opinion piece in Mudflats, I started hearing from fellow bloggers that Mike Doogan was trying to figure out who I was.  It seemed strange to me, because really, all I’d done was take his own words and actions and comment on them.  Anyone was perfectly free to disagree, or comment on the piece.  “He’s rabid,” one blogger told me.  Wow.  Rabid?  I guess I struck a nerve.  Over the past few months, I’ve had other messages through the grapevine that he was trying to figure out who I am.

He eventually determined who AKMuckraker is.  This is how he he let everyone know who AkMuckraker really is in his official newsletter to his constituents:

Anonymous Blogger Anonymous No More

The identity of the person who writes the liberal Democratic Mudflats blog has been secret since the blog began, protected by the Anchorage Daily News, among others. My own theory about the public process is you can say what you want, as long as you are willing to stand behind it using your real name. So I was interested to learn that the woman who writes the blog is Anchorage resident *********.

Best wishes,

When I first learned about this, I was furious. I don’t know what the blogger’s reasons are for wanting to remain anonymous, but my guess would be it’s awfully hard on your economic opportunities to be a raging progressive in a glowing red state.  Even worse, the blogger has been famously critical of Sarah Palin who appears to relish any and every opportunity to get even with people and who has a lust for blood and creepy obsession with the anonymous bloggers who have been so critical of her.  It has already been determined that she has abused the power of her office while trying to ger her brother-in-law fired, I can’t imagine why AKMuckraker might want to remain anonymous.  

I can also understand Ak’s concerns because I have also been highly critical of Sarah Palin.  However, I decided not to remain anonymous so I fully realize some of the consequences of that decision.  I have had threatening emails from Palin groupies and other conservative bloggers who don’t like my take on the world.  One blogger even published my home address along with a picture of it on his website along with a bunch of lies about who I am and what I do for a living.  I have had people call me a communist, lazy, crazy, stupid, fat, threaten me, tell me to “watch the rooftops for guns,” threaten my cat, threaten my family and I have been mobbed and cyberstalked. And most of that was just during the past week! No, I cannot understand why AKMuckraker would want to remain anonymous.  Not at all. 

I was so stunned when I read about this and felt so badly for AKMuckraker that I immediately wanted to do something.  AkMuckraker is not alone in wanting to remain anonymous.  There are people out there in red states who if their blogging identity was revealed would suffer harsh consequences ranging from financial to verbal abuse.  This is not funny and should not be taken lightly.  This is interference with free speech and on a topic that the forefathers wanted the First Amendment to protect – political speech – especially political speech critical of those in power because that is the very essence of a democracy.

In Doe v. 2themart.com Inc., 140 F. Supp 2d 1088 (W.D. Wash. 2001), the District Court wrote about the importance of protecting anonymous free speech:

The Internet represents a revolutionary advance in communication technology. It has been suggested that the Internet may be the “greatest innovation in speech since the invention of the printing press[.]” See Raymond Shih Ray Ku, Open Internet Access and Freedom of Speech: A First Amendment Catch-22, 75 Tul. L. Rev. 87, 88 (2000). It allows people from all over the world to exchange ideas and information freely and in “real-time.” Through the use of the Internet, “any person with a phone line can become a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox.” Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 870, 138 L. Ed. 2d 874, 117 S. Ct. 2329 (1997).

***

The right to the freedom of speech is enshrined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which provides that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press[.]“ U.S. Const. amend. I. This limitation on governmental interference with free speech applies directly to the federal government, and has been imposed on the states via the Fourteenth Amendment. See, e.g., First Nat’l Bank v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 779-80, 55 L. Ed. 2d 707, 98 S. Ct. 1407 (1978).

***
First Amendment protections extend to speech via the Internet. “Through the use of web pages, mail exploders and newsgroups, [any person] can become a pamphleteer.” Reno, 521 U.S. at 870. A component of the First Amendment is the right to speak with anonymity. This component of free speech is well established. See, e.g., Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Found., 525 U.S. 182, 200, 142 L. Ed. 2d 599, 119 S. Ct. 636 (1999)(invalidating, on First Amendment grounds, a Colorado statute that required initiative petition circulators to wear identification badges); McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n, 514 U.S. 334, 357, 131 L. Ed. 2d 426, 115 S. Ct. 1511 (1995)   (overturning an Ohio law that prohibited the distribution of campaign literature that did not contain the name and address of the person issuing the literature, holding that “under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and dissent. Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.”); Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 65, 4 L. Ed. 2d 559, 80 S. Ct. 536 (1960)(invalidating a California statute prohibiting the distribution of “any handbill in any place under any circumstances” that did not contain the name and address of the person who prepared it, holding that identification and fear of reprisal might deter “perfectly peaceful discussions of public matters of importance.”)

The right to speak anonymously was of fundamental importance to the establishment of our Constitution. Throughout the revolutionary and early federal period in American history, anonymous speech and the use of pseudonyms were powerful tools of political debate. The Federalist Papers (authored by Madison, Hamilton, and Jay) were written anonymously under the name “Publius.” The anti-federalists responded with   anonymous articles of their own, authored by “Cato” and “Brutus,” among others. See generally McIntyre, 514 U.S. at 341-42. Anonymous speech is a great tradition that is woven into the fabric of this nation’s history.

The right to speak anonymously extends to speech via the Internet. Internet anonymity facilitates the rich, diverse, and far ranging exchange of ideas. The “ability to speak one’s mind” on the Internet “without the burden of the other party knowing all the facts about one’s identity can foster open communication and robust debate.” Columbia Ins. Co. v. Seescandy.com, 185 F.R.D. 573, 578 (N.D. Cal. 1999). People who have committed no wrongdoing should be free to participate in online forums without fear that their identity will be exposed under the authority of the court. Id.

When speech touches on matters of public political life, such as debate over    the qualifications of candidates, discussion of governmental or political affairs, discussion of political campaigns, and advocacy of controversial points of view, such speech has been described as the “core” or “essence” of the First Amendment. See McIntyre, 514 U.S. at 346-47. 

So, really, who is Mike Doogan to “out” an anonymous blogger anyway.  We all have the right to our opinions about our elected officials (and those who want to be elected). His obsession about the highly successful AkMuckraker has violated not only the rights of the blogger, but the very ideals upon which this country was founded.  Was he trying to squelch the bloggers’ voice? We’ll never know, but he had to know that could be a possibility and that, my friends, cannot be tolerated. We cannot allow our elected officials to silence voices of the opposition, or even voices of criticism.

If you believe, as I do, that anonymous bloggers have a right to remain anonymous, please post about his conduct.  He’s clearly too ignorant to know any better, but that doesn’t mean we should let him get away with it because if he does, you may be the next anonymous blogger that some ignoramus thinks should be “outed” no matter what the consequences to you and your family and despite the Constitutional protections afforded to anonymous authors of critical political speech.

Mike Doogan you are the worst person of the year.  I hope you are never elected again.  I hope you never sell a book again. And I hope  that every anonymous blogger posts about what you did because you deserve for the entire world to know what a cad you really are.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::