This community opinion was contributed by Supervisor Kollin Kosmicki. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent BenitoLink or other affiliated contributors. Lea este artículo en español aquí.
Benitolink has set an extremely dangerous precedent by failing to implement simple measures to prevent anonymous attack columns filled with unverified, false accusations.
Benitolink has published opinion pieces with evidence suggesting the likely use of pseudonyms. Even worse, some have included outrageously false statements presented as facts that Benitolink ‒ in an act of defiance ‒ has openly neglected to verify.
These cowardly commentaries create a false perception the writers own their positions. Many readers won’t think twice about the legitimacy of such a writer’s identity, and some will inherently believe the false claims. At that point, the damage is irreparable.
Considering Benitolink is aware of this problem, it is essential for this media organization to install appropriate safeguards.
As you can guess, I have been a target in some of these suspicious columns with false and defamatory claims presented as facts. Especially since I was a career journalist before taking office, I’m fully aware I must accept criticism on a regular basis. Being criticized is part of the job and should be. I embrace it, when accusations aren’t made up and defamatory.
What shouldn’t be part of the job is accepting a media organization to allow anyone to make false claims about me or others, and do so without putting a name behind their lies.
As of now, Benitolink only requires someone submitting an opinion piece to provide a name and email address. It’s pretty obvious that anyone can pick a random name ‒ typically a common first and last name to deter suspicion ‒ and create a fake email address.
In a matter of days, the “Public Letter” or “Community Commentary” shows up on Benitolink presented as a legitimate letter. Benitolink then shares these propaganda pieces on social media, spurring unhealthy dialogue with false information.
Along with this easily correctable anonymity flaw, Benitolink has allowed opinion writers to spread false, defamatory information posed as statements of fact in these columns.
When I alerted Benitolink’s management about one in June, weeks after another similarly false piece had been published about me and a board colleague, Benitolink Executive Director Leslie David’s response was shocking from a basic journalism ethics standpoint. She insisted it was OK to publish that content with unverified statements of fact because they were presented as someone’s opinion.
Eventually, Benitolink actually removed that opinion piece after back-and-forth dialogue over phone and email with Benitolink’s initially resistant management, but only after I pointed out there were legitimate reasons to believe the writer used a pseudonym. Benitolink attempted to verify the writer’s legitimacy and ‒ surprise, surprise ‒ couldn’t do so. Benitolink still somehow has that headline published ‒ “Supervisor shows contempt for county staff” ‒ but deleted the text and added a note indicating they removed the piece because it violated their rules prohibiting anonymous content.
You can still read the headline and explanation for removal here: https://benitolink.com/community-opinion-supervisor-shows-contempt-for-county-staff/
To be clear as someone who built a career as a journalist: There is nothing ethical about giving someone a platform to make inflammatory, unverified, false accusations. There is no credibility to Benitolink’s absurd defense that it is OK to publish unverified accusations under the umbrella of community commentary.
To the contrary, Benitolink must take steps to verify such inflammatory accusations if it wishes to publish them. Otherwise, Benitolink should require writer verification, remove those statements or leave the piece unpublished. Benitolink can’t even use the excuse that this is a complicated challenge.
Yes, use of pseudonyms ‒ or fake profiles on social media ‒ is increasingly common. There are easy solutions if Benitolink really wants to prevent this behavior. Credible media organizations have mechanisms in place. So should Benitolink and the Hollister Free Lance, for that matter, which doesn’t seem to be a target for this behavior so far.
The standard in newspaper journalism is to require a name, address and phone number so editors can verify writers’ identities and deter pseudonym use. Requiring a phone number would significantly reduce the risk. I would argue even this standard needs improvement due to the escalating trend, particularly in Benitolink’s case since there are signs that pseudonym attacks have become a real issue.
The best solution is to require opinion writers to provide a scanned I.D. that includes the person’s name and address, along with a phone number for any necessary follow-up verification. That information would stay internal, but create a safeguard and prevent attempts at anonymous attacks.
Continuing to neglect this issue is a disservice to our community and will continue to further degrade Benitolink’s already diminished credibility.
BenitoLink Replies:
A significant part of BenitoLink’s mission is to be an open platform for our community, rather than having a traditional editorial section where we control who is published and what people get to say. Because of this mission, we rarely hold back Community Opinion pieces. These opinions are not always 100% accurate but we do not think it is our role to edit someone else’s opinion—especially with regards to elected officials. We also have Terms of Use that are meant to control any abuse of the freedom of speech we are offering.
BenitoLink allows any community member or elected official to share their ideas by publishing a Community Opinion. In each case, we make a good-faith effort to verify the identity of the writer.
In three instances over the past six months, as Supervisor Kosmicki points out, we have published Community Opinions by writers whose identities we were not able to verify. We have taken these posts down and we apologize for the oversight.
This week, we have taken further steps to ensure the identities of the authors of Community Opinions.
As to Supervisor Kosmicki’s opinion regarding BenitoLink’s credibility, this non-profit news organization has built a solid reputation over the past 13 years and it is not unprecedented for elected officials to attack the media outlets that cover them.
BenitoLink Staff
BenitoLink invites all community members to share their ideas and opinions. By registering as a BenitoLink user in the top right corner of our home page and agreeing to follow our Terms of Use, you can write counter opinions or share your insights on current issues.