Since when was anything about the Labor Party ‘progressive’? Labor has retreated further back into its Red totalitarian guise. It has jumped into bed with the far-Left Greens who will drag it even further back into the dark ages to ‘save the planet’ to the detriment of people.

And, Mr. Stanton, they only ‘formed government’ with the help of a spurned conservative with a personal axe to grind, and an unknown. They are not an elected government.

As for the media versus bloggers, who cares? The organised media is a disgrace, interested only in sensationalism and keeping people scared; and the blogs don’t have the influence that the traditional media says they have – it’s just that they – the lefty media - don’t like the fact that conservatives get the chance to have a say without getting the silent treatment from newspaper editors.

In relation to the recent outing of public servant blogger Grog: there is an important differential. Journalism is an occupation and as such the journalist is performing the duties of their role. Bloggers in the main, have other jobs, and if they are in the public service anonymity may be important given the impartial nature of the public service. Public servants may hold opinions that don't always marry with the Government of the day, but they are paid to be impartial and carry out their duties nonetheless.

It would be difficult for a blogger public servant to use his/her real name and to do so may have consequences. Should public servants and others in similar positions, be prevented from writing opinion pieces if anonymity cannot be guaranteed. Of course it is different if a blogger starts outing people and using names of other public servants in a piece and not expect similar in return. Public servants are often outed on opinion sites even on OLO, and they do not have the privilege of a return of reply due to privacy considerations of their client base. As such, public servants are in a different position as a journalist who has greater freedoms by the nature of their work.

I would dispute the claim that Grog had any effect on ABC reporting or policy. Where has this claim come from and what is there to back it up. But that is beside the point, a blogger is not ultimately responsible for the policy decisions of an organisation.

Generally bloggers and people who post to sites like OLO are having a rant about something or using it as a vehicle for their favourite hobby horse. We all do it. That does not make it illegitmate and in fact opens up the opportunity to put forward a view not always reflected in news media.

A multilayered issue, this one.

First up, what is it about technology that people refuse to understand?

There isn't a snowball's chance in Beelzebub's inferno of maintaining blogging anonymity for any length of time, unless one employs the most sophisticated of secret-squirrel measures.

Can we please take it as read that online anonymity is a mirage. Anyway, as I recall reading about this chap, his family and "about twenty" close friends already knew. Some "anonymity".

So what is this really about?

If a public servant has agreed, in his terms of employment, that any public pronouncements should be restricted to those permitted by his position and status within the public service, then he should respect that agreement.

Whether his views are made available on a blog, or in sky-writing over Bondi beach on a public holiday, is irrelevant. If you don't want your employer to find out what you really think, don't publish.

And the "outing"?

Whether the news is broken by a "right-wing rag" or a "progressive left newspaper" is also irrelevant. A RWR will print news that bags their cultural opponents, as will the PLN. It is their job. Think Piers Akerman and David Marr.

Good grief. How come these journalists suddenly become so precious? It's not as though they have scruples, after all.

The ONLY reason some Newspapers hate blogger anonymity is simply because it means their competitors pulling apart their faulty information cannot be identified and slandered (which is really the only thing such papers are good at, such as publishing, for absolutely no reason, personal details of the Australian-flag-hat lady in Camden, or slandering the Chk Chk Boom lady because they were stupid enough to go with her take on events instead of actually checking with some other witnesses if the story stood up. Strangely enough, better quality papers and news outlets can go with it completely.

And considering all of the anonymous editor comments they permit in their expert column sections stating 'facts' in policy (who may well be politicians or lobbyists themselves), they have absolutely no right to complain, especially when they occupy a social position that assumes truthfulness and transparency.

Anyway, anonymous blogging is a fantastic human development- it means ideas can now be shared without the persons saying them fearing for their lives, and that now debates are more about ideas than personalities;
Instead of checking the name of somebody to see what axe to grind, people are now required to be smart enough to guess from the author's content.

There is only one reason murdochs minions want bloggers names.
So that they can character assassinate and defame them.
Newslimited is the name and limited news is what you get.
So many lies, distortions and sensationalism. no wonder journalists are seen as the scum of the earth.
The Australian is the propaganda arm of the Liberal party and the rich.
The rest of murdochs media are muck raking tabloid rags that pander to(and propagate)the moronic and the stupified masses with populist pap and fearmongering.
Goebbels would be so proud.

Just a thought, but in how many issues is Labor progressive? In most of the major policy areas they don't differ greatly from the Coalition.

Also, from what I gather the Greens tend to be progressive on some issues and at the same time hard socialists.

I wonder if there are any progressives left in the Liberals or have they all joined the Tasmanian tiger already?

http://currentglobalperceptions.blogspot.com/