TAP Names Names (Except His Own)

True American Patriot has submitted a comment linked to a blog post in which he alleges widespread conspiracy in a case of injustice. Although he does not give his name, he uses every one else's name, including mine. His point is that because people "friended" on Facebook the alleged perpetrator of this injustice, they are all complicit.

I never heard about the 2009 incident he cites and I am sorry for those who feel they have been dealt an injustice despite court findings to the contrary.

Having said that, his allegation brings up something I have been thinking about for a while. The social media phenomenon has possibly resulted in a breakdown of the arm's-length position that used to be a rule for news gatherers. Now almost everybody is being told to get on Facebook, Twitter and other social media, even journalists and legislators. It is suggested as a good strategy for bloggers as well. So now are we all to be implicated in the misdeeds of anyone else to whom we are linked by social media?

TAP also accuses numerous elected officials of having "helped" the accused individual out of the charges against him, as well as some people who patronized his business. This is really far-fetched, as most people don't look for a dossier on a given merchant before making a transaction.

But it is the social media aspect that is under question here. What sort of bond does linking to someone imply? I do not accept TAP's premise that being "facebook buddies" (sic) means a wholesale condoning of alleged or actual behavior of the other party.

Nor do I accept the notion that a blogger has to post every comment from an anonymous reader.

So TAP, I must disappoint you you on two counts. I did not participate in any cover-up of injustice in Plainfield and I am not going to post the comment linked to the blog where you make your anonymous accusations.

--Bernice