Good read by Jason Falls on Social Media Explorer about court case in Kentucky.  A woman is suing the local newspaper for defamation because of an anonymous comment on a story about her.  This, of course, leads to the bigger question:

Should anonymous commenting be allowed?

I used to be a big fan of it.  As a former newspaper reporter, I understand the power of anonymity for an insider wanting to blow the whistle on bad or even illegal practices.  Anonymous commenting gives people who are afraid to speak out the soap box to do so (just think about the situation in Iran, for example).

But unfortunately many people use anonymous commenting to be rude, crude and abusive.  They hide behind the anonymity to be vicious and treat people in ways they would never treat them if forced to identify themselves.  The problem at newspapers and other web sites is that they don't want to police the comments sections.  It would be a resource nightmare for an employee to constantly comb through comments on every single story.  But if they aren't willing to do that - perhaps they should reconsider anonymous commenting.

It will be interesting to watch what the courts do with the Kentucky case cited by Jason.

My policy at my blogs (and here at HighTalk on Posterous) is to allow anonymous commenting - but with the caveat that I have full editorial control and will delete any comments I find offensive.  I have only had to delete one comment in more than three years of blogging (other than the blatant spam - which I delete with extreme prejudice).  This may be because I have a high tolerance for abuse (and rubber like skin).  But every blog or web publication should have some type of commenting policy.

Share your thoughts - even anonymously if you like.