The worst thing any writer can do is to be dishonest with the readers. 

By “dishonest”, I’m not talking about manipulating the details to make a story a little more interesting.  Within reason, that’s simple, poetic license.  It’s done a lot more than most people might care to admit, and it’s really not a bad thing as long as it doesn’t change the essential truth of the story. 

Changing the essential truth… that’s the key, I suppose.  Omit a little bit here, and a little bit there, and suddenly a story becomes an editorial.  With the right trim here and there, you can make Superman sound like Lex Luthor.  Fact becomes fiction becomes a lie…

As bloggers, I believe we have just as much responsibility to present these essential truths to the readers as any other professional journalist.  To be sure, we can certainly editorialize and present our opinions.  That’s part of the value of this format.  Of course, the other side (and the thing that makes it really valuable), is that our readers can respond to our opinions with their own thoughts, even if they don’t agree with ours.  The idea is to tell the readers what you think, and why, but not to tell them what they should think. 

I’ve taken great pride on the HogBlog in allowing individuals to speak their minds, as long as they aren’t spewing hatred, outright lies, or extremely foul language.  We’ve had anti-hunters and non-hunters here, and the ensuing dialogue was enlightening to everyone at some level.  We’ve debated the lead ammo issue at many levels, again with the same result.  We’ve even talked about tricky topics like high-fence hunting, and while debate may have become a little heated, it was civil and educational.  Every commenter and every comment receives due respect, both from me and from other readers. 

What I have never done is delete a comment because it pissed me off or offered a challenge that I couldn’t meet.  That is the worst kind of dishonesty, because by doing something like that you rob the other readers of the opportunity to make up their own minds.  You’ve also effectively gagged a valid participant in the conversation simply because you couldn’t offer a rejoinder or rebuttal to their position. 

Ducking behind the “Delete Comment”  button is an unacceptable kind of cowardice, and it devastates the credibility of the entire site.  Once you set that precedent, no one can ever trust you not to do it again, nor can they trust that you haven’t been doing it all along.      At that point you become irrelevant.

What I’m saying is, I think I’ve stayed pretty honest with all of you readers and fellow-bloggers.  I intend to keep it that way. 

I recently had an experience on another blog where a frustrated blogger decided that, rather than face my challenge to support his (quite slanderous) claims with facts, he’d simply delete my posts and block me from commenting.  I briefly thought about posting the entire exchange here, including the deleted posts, but realized that would be really silly and kind of egotistical on my part. 

The whole exchange was a sad reminder of why so many people discount the validity of blogs and the  ”new media” as information sources.  This guy, and others like him,  is making his own reality and presenting it as truth.  What’s worse, though, is that folks don’t always realize that bloggers like this guy are also writing for the print media, and appearing in pretty major magazines where they don’t have a “backstage audience” to keep them honest.  If we can’t trust them on the blogs, should we trust them in print?

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, and he’ll tell you what he wants you to hear. 

And if you listen to his whispered lies, he’ll tell you what to think and what to fear.

Related Posts