The Internet is driving people crazy, especially people who find themselves, their organizations, businesses or politics the subject of criticism in anonymous online comments.
Comment sections on newspapers and special-interest websites have become hideouts for foul-mouthed anonymous trolls who take potshots at everything and everyone under the sun.
Yet, perfectly polite and sensible people who don't want to reveal their identities, sometimes for fear of retribution, also use online comment sections.
Contrast this with letters to the editor published in printed newspaper editions. They carry the name of the author or a "Name withheld by request" signature that's been approved by a newspaper if someone demonstrates that retribution—for example, physical harm or loss of a job—would be likely if the author were known.
Starting today on the Idaho Mountain Express' website, mtexpress.com, it's going to be a lot harder to post an anonymous comment.
After months of research and experiments with various pieces of software that didn't work, the newspaper is joining newspapers like the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and growing numbers of smaller community newspapers and websites in requiring comment section users to log in through social media services including Facebook and Google.
Judging by responses at other websites that recently adopted this practice, it will inspire both joy and fury in the comment community.
And it's still not a foolproof way to guarantee that people who post comments do so with true identities. That's not possible short of expending tens of thousands of non-existent dollars on manpower to actively moderate comment areas.
Congress made anonymous online comments possible in 1996 when it enacted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, with the stated goal "to offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development and myriad avenues for intellectual activity."
That law relieves "interactive service providers" from legal liability for objectionable content. In other words, the law treats comment boards like telephone services that carry communications but bear no responsibility for content.
Federal law treats opinions published in newspapers differently than online comments. Print publishers are legally liable for content. That's why newspapers verify the identities of authors of letters to the editor.
What's the law got to do with it? Shouldn't websites force authors of online comments to be polite? It's not that easy.
Because technology wasn't available to link social website identities to comments until very recently, most websites asked the comment community to police itself by sending complaints to the owner of the website to trigger a review of potentially offensive comments.
The Mountain Express handled complaints this way as well. With new software, comment board users now will be able more easily to flag a problem comment for review simply by clicking once on an icon. If three users flag a comment, it will be hidden until the newspaper reviews it for compliance with user rules.
The rules prohibit profane, libelous, abusive or defamatory remarks, or comments that invade the privacy of private persons. The rules also prohibit racial slurs and hate speech. Full rules are posted on the website.
Users should not flag comments just because they disagree with them.
While the theory is that better identification will make comments more civil, anyone who thinks that forcing people to use real identities online is a simple issue to which black and white solutions, like prohibiting comments altogether, should be applied should think again.
They should consider that the authors of the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, used pseudonyms to prevent their high profiles from obscuring their arguments.
Thomas Paine published "Common Sense" anonymously to avoid being charged with treason. The pamphlet challenged the authority of the British government in the American colonies.
American law is slowly catching up with challenges posed by the Internet. Most courts have concurred with Congress and protected anonymous posts.
It's worth noting that of the hundreds of comments posted on stories on mtexpress.com since January, just 24, or less than 1 percent, generated complaints.
It's also worth remembering that in 2008, Ketchum Community Development Corporation Director Gary Rapport was unmasked as a fugitive from a felony burglary charge in California by an online comment posted on mtexpress.com.
The debate over online comments isn't going to go away anytime soon.
