With The Methow Valley News recently bringing the attention of a wider audience to this topic by publishing their “snitch list blog” article (available on their site, or archived here), there is some fact checking needed. I will address here the most important concerns.
The largest issue with the paper’s article is that the writer angles to blame me for the entire state of affairs – that I am somehow personally responsible for the fear, division, intimidation and other social problems that this whole situation dredges up. I maintain that I am just the messenger here. I have seen a problem, pointed it out, and suggested a solution. That is the limit of my power or control over the situation. In other words, the barn is on fire. I have told everyone I can that the barn is on fire and that decisive action is necessary to prevent further damage. I provided a suggestion as to how I think the fire could be put out. However I did not set the fire, and it’s false to suggest that I am responsible for the fire simply by pointing it out and making the public more aware of it.
The second factual problem with the article is the oft-repeated claim by a totally unknown person that I attempted to publish my snitch list article anonymously. This was such an obvious falsehood that it shouldn’t have been published unchallenged. The claim is that I published the article anonymously, yet somehow did so while using a significant portion of my real name? And that while allegedly attempting to remain anonymous in publishing this article, I further used my real name elsewhere when promoting the aforementioned article? The paper’s writer certainly didn’t seem to have had any difficulty in making the leap of connecting my name to the article. In making that presumptive leap, perhaps she relied too heavily on the accuracy of what is found on the internet and the somewhat misinformed allegations of an entirely anonymous individual, one with an obvious axe to grind. Giving too much credence to inherently unreliable information is discouraged by journalism’s ethical standards.
It is true that I didn’t speak with the MVN writer when she attempted to contact me. I had no desire to, and further, I had no need to. I had already published everything that I wanted to say on the subject at that time. For those of you who might respond that I could have corrected these factual issues earlier by speaking to the article writer: no, that’s not necessarily true. That’s assuredly not how the conventional media works these days, and there are numerous examples of that fact available. The article’s slant and tone was already decided, and my speaking further would have only provided more avenues of attack against me. Naturally, I had no inclination to participate. However, I am saddened that uninvolved community members, with nothing more than some connection to me that could be googled, were unnecessarily dragged into the fray without warning.
The paper’s article did help illustrate some of the threats, intimidation, and anonymous attacks against me since publishing my article, and for that I thank them. Unfortunately, those things come along with the territory of telling the unpleasant truth.