Editorial: What’s in a blog?

Thursday, Aug. 10, 2006 | 7:35 a.m.

Political rhetoric has never been considered particularly fair or truthful, but at least voters could weigh its importance by considering its source.

But that has changed with Internet Web logs, or blogs, that allow people to conceal their identities while attacking candidates with unproved rumors or vicious lies. According to a story by the Las Vegas Sun on Wednesday, bloggers here have falsely accused political candidates in Nevada of being racist and addicted to gambling, among other scurrilous charges.

It's the electronic equivalent of the back yard gossip fence with one important exception - those listening have no idea who is talking.

Some activists laud the blogosphere for improving the reach of grass-roots political movements - blogs have been credited, in part, for this week's defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary. However, the Sun notes, corporate money and political machines also produce some of these online rumor mills. And bloggers are exempt from campaign finance laws, so they don't have to reveal their financial supporters.

Libel laws that prevent mainstream media from publishing lies also apply to blogs. But because the authors are anonymous, it is difficult to figure out who should be held responsible. And once the rumors are out there, the damage is done.

The Internet is a wonderful tool that can inform people with immediacy. But it doesn't always do so accurately. It is important that voters obtain information from a variety of sources - preferably those who aren't afraid to show themselves.