I was recently contacted by a newspaper journalist requesting a phone interview for an upcoming business story. This was exciting news. A PR firm called me with a similar opportunity a few months ago. However, things fell through on their end, so it never happened.
This time around everything seemed like it was going to work out. I did have one request though. I must retain my anonymity/pseudonymity. No big deal, right? People blog under pseudonyms all the time.
Wrong.
After talking to the editor, the reporter told me that I’d have to give my name to get interviewed for the story. Without a moment of hesitation, I knew my answer. No.
I declined because I value my anonymity too much to give it up. This is a personal finance blog after all. I post personal things, including specific figures related to my personal finances. The moment my actual name gets attached to this blog, anybody who knows me (past or present) could find out about my finances by simply googling my name.
On the other hand, I wonder if I’m limiting the growth of Broke Grad Student by passing up media and press opportunities like this. When an anonymous blogger becomes popular, they usually end up revealing their identity anyway, but at that point, it’s usually due to circumstance rather than choice. I’m willing to wait for that circumstance (if it ever happens).
I can understand why the editor wanted a name to attach to the blog — credibility. But, honestly, what’s in a name these days? Penelope Trunk is living proof that you can build credibility using a fake name.
In hindsight, I could have used a fictitious name to appease the editor, gone ahead with the interview, and the content would have been exactly the same. From their point of view, it would have been more credible. From my point of view, it would have been more of a lie.
The truth is that credibility lies in the hands of the readers, not the writers. Regardless of what name you write under, everyone else has the final say on whether or not to trust you, so what difference does a name make? It’s the content that really counts.
This is why I blog pseudonymously and plan on keeping it that way.
If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to my RSS feed or via email for free updates.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }
Well said my friend. I chose to hide my identity based on the idea of Clark Kent/Superman. I want to keep the lives apart as the personalities of both people are slightly different. There are other reasons too but I like to pretend I’m a super hero with a mild mannered daily life. I do use my first name on occasion, but do prefer The Weakonomist normally.
I do not think you nor your content would be the same if you did not post under your alias. When you sit down to write you have a certain mindset that lets you concentrate on reaching your general reader. If you know that someone out there actually knows you, an ounce of hesitation may come up when you write something that relates to them. Writing anonymously allows all of us (who do it) to let it rip with no holding back, I think that is why we keep doing it.
I agree with Doctor S, if people knew who you are, that could affect your writing style. Again, depends on your feelings, a lot of people could care less if people know them. It’s nice to hear that you stuck up for your morals though and didn’t go through with it for that reason.
It sure would have been nice to have an article that drew a lot of traffic to your site, though. I like to play my finances close to the vest, too. My wife will tell anyone anything…so if I tried to keep it under wraps that I had a blog or how much money I made at my job, I’m pretty sure my cover would be blown anyway.
I hear ya bro, it sure is a con at times….but like everyone says, you gotta just keep doing your thing and be happy with yourself
I haven’t been contacted from a major news source yet (at least i’m hoping!), but i’d have no problem giving out “J. Money” and hope they take the bite. it’s pretty obvious it’s a fake name, but maybe i’d get lucky?
Actually, that reminds me – Money Mag last year named a few major PF bloggers in their Mag and Jonathan over at MyMoneyBlog.com got named and it stated it was an Anon. site…guess it all depends on who’s writing it up.
interesting post though nonetheless, and CONGRATS on getting the opp.!
Well, first of all, that’s awesome and congratulations for being asked! Second, I don’t know why they couldn’t talk about you using the Broke Grad Student title. A while back, the NY Times did a piece that mentioned some top PF bloggers, and each one gave his or her first name, which was a compromise of sorts. Either way, if you’re respected enough to be read and to be considered for this type of thing, you should be able to use the name that’s gotten you there.
This is the kind of thing I think about a lot, mostly when I steered towards not using my site as much. Would I want to use it to point towards other projects I worked on? Would I want to ever give my real name? Truth is, finances are personal. The very idea that my coworkers or bosses or whatever would know how much money I have is just uncomfortable. That’s probably why I like having an anonymous blog: it gives me a place to talk about these things.
I think you did the right thing. Your writing will be all the more frank if you had no worries of anyone knowing who you were.
Still I am really surprised why your name mattered so much to the paper.
“The truth is that credibility lies in the hands of the readers, not the writers”
–True that. Definitely quotable!
So I’m curious, do any of your closest family members know that you blog?
Why not a pseudonym? I don’t think that’s a lie. I don’t go by a pseudonym but I know plenty of people who do and it really doesn’t change their writing or the experiences they talk about.
Blake: Nope. I used to keep a personal blog that my family followed, but it has fallen to wayside since I started this blog. They occasionally ask why I never blog anymore.
jim: It’s not that I’m against using a pseudonym. I just wasn’t prepared to give them one at the time, so it caught me off guard. It would have felt like a lie, because I would have been giving them a name that I had never used before.
Lots of writers use a pen name. I don’t see why a reporter should have a problem with it. It worked for Mark Twain and Dr. Seuss, why not you?
Hey broke grad student, I like your blog, but I’m gonna disagree with you for the first time. I may have a different perspective from the people who posted above because I’m a reporter myself (I currently work for a small-town newspaper). The reason editors rarely allow people to use pseudonyms, or just their first names, is because folks have to be held accountable for what they say. Just look at YouTube comments… the libelous & inflammatory b*llshit people post on there shocks me. If people had to post their real names in full, they’d think twice before publishing an outright lie, or slandering a public figure, or swearing at one of their fellow YouTubers. Plus, I can’t tell you how many times politicians and the like will try to stab their colleagues in the back, or try to ruin someone’s career, by saying to a reporter, “I’ll give you a juicy piece of inside information, but you can’t reveal my name”… and then the information turns out to be untrue.
Google “problems with confidential sources” or something along those lines, and you’ll get TONNES of examples where granting confidentiality has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
As a result, news outlets set strict rules for granting confidentiality. I’d only hide someone’s identity if (1) their safety, health or *SOMETIMES* their job is at risk if they talk, and (2) what they say is ABSOLUTELY important for the public to know.
I’ve come to realize that yes, it does take more guts to be held accountable for your comments. But 99% of the time, if you’re not willing to say something with your name attached, then what you had to say probably wasn’t that important after all.
PS – I actually have to correct myself… if people post untrue, malicious information to tarnish someone’s character on YouTube, that’s technically not slander, but rather libel, because it’s “published” online
Depends on what you’re writing about. If youre trying to sell something its always better to have your name attached to it