Suppose you are aware of a disreputable story about person x, known to you; you find a version of this story—entirely anonymised—on a blog kept by person y, known to both you and x, but not, so far as you know, read by x. What do you do?
The possible courses of action seem to me
- Do nothing. The story is true, but not attached to any kind of identifying information
- Contact blogger y and suggest, or demand that they remove the story lest some malicious person get hold of it and turn it to x’s disadvantage. Add, to taste, a denunciation of their cruelty, heartlesness, voyeurism, etc.
- Ring up x at breakfast and say “Guess what y has written about you?” Then read them the story.
I would be particularly interested in defences of option (3) because I can’t myself think of any.
Is x aware that you know of the disreputable story? If so then option 3 would seem defensible as you and x have a shared secret and by alerting x you make it less likely that you are accused of betraying it and acknowledge your friendship by giving x a chance to act.
If x is not aware that you know the story, then if y is aware you can call them, and if y is not aware you can do nothing without damaging your own reputation and (in all likelihood) failing to preserve that of x or indeed y….
This all depends whether one is working to personal ethics, journalistic ethics or blogging ethics – and if you feel able to operate in any of the three magisteria, which one fits best your relationship with X
If the first, then asking Y to pull the story is the act of a true friend – providing always that Y isn’t going to chuckle and rub his hands like a fly cleaning off shit before updating their blog to say “And guess what, confirmation from…”. This depends on Y. Keeping quiet may be better, particularly if you suspect that this will allow the non-story to die a decent and swift death.
If the second, you should put a story, suitably anonymised, up on your own blog, asking your readers what they think – written with a subtle mix of despair at the state of the world and joy of knowing something that others do not
If the third, then as above – with links.
There is no moral frame that provides justification for your third course of action. Except that it could be enormous fun, and may precipitate a long-running feud from which one may benefit in all the traditional ways. It could be that this will sour one’s relationship with Y, and further that one might care, in which case an anonymous email may take the place of the breakfast phone call. If detected, you may find yourself called after some body part or function of the lower torso, and justifiably.
R
Another consideration is whether either or both x or/and y read your blog. You might, at this very moment, have a large and paranoid readership going through the rest of your regular reads looking for themselves.
But obviously it’s clear that there’s absolutely no defence for action the third. Only a peculiarly unpleasant and spiteful person would pursue that option. I would go for the first.
The ordinary factors you surely have already inventoried; your intention, who is harmed, what will lead to most happiness for most people, whether you are being asked to lie, whether you are trying to protect your own reputation or theirs, whether keeping the story private is being used by anyone to further their own ends, will exposure confirm already harbored suspicions,…
Privacy in the age of the web and saved emails and instant messaging seems to be a contested ground.
To offer advice, hell even to think about this, I want to fill out the variables and drag you back from moral algebra. Are we talking about a victim and a witness, a politician and a reporter, a cuckold and a cad, a perp and an accuser, a representative or House speaker and a page, a patient and someone who over heard a conversation with her doctor, a confessor, a paparazzi, … the list goes on and each of these constructions would tell us more about what you think is going on and would probably frame the question to justify certain stances. I suppose you wanted to strip that trick of self-fulfillment from the question when you gave us x and y (your are z?).
I sense in your note the desire to actually carry out plan 3. I would put this in the category of “my best friend’s boyfriend is cheating on her. I know but she doesn’t, should I tell her?” These kinds of truths burn a hole in your pocket. You really want to spend them. I would urge caution and suggest visiting and revisiting intention.
Unless you can cause the original blogger to expunge the reference you are protected a bit from Dr. John’s maxim, “If I don’t do it, somebody else will." Assuming that you are describing things that matter to one of our self-selected, self-referential web “communities” the blog will be shared at some point.
Finally, and I should have started here. Why not ask the person who is most affected what they would have you do? Or ask them both?
I’m fascinated by these replies, and by the consistently low opinion that my friends have of my character.
In any case, let me remove a little of the suspense by saying that I was, in this example, blogger y. Person x, a regular reader here, is welcome to contribute. I know who you are, and in due course will publish the name.
I quite see now that I should not have printed amusing anonymised story because I am old enough to know that everything published on the internet will sooner or later read where it will do most damage, if nowhere else. But I still can’t see any justification for what person x did.
Update: Person x has rung me to explain her actions. The explanation seems to me to involve thoughtlesness rather than deliberate malice. Makes the story more interesting in some ways, at least as an example of communicative disasters. In any case, it’s time for a group hug and a discreet silence.
Ah… now it’s a bit clearer. It should cause some introspection that it hadn’t occurred to me that you were the blogger. My apologies for suggesting that you were keen on plan 3 and looking for justification. lo siento…
It’s unlikely that she would have lost her job though; it would have had to be pretty awful.