In the almost four years that Newslaundry has been around, we have stayed away from publishing anonymous pieces. I explain why here and Rain Man disagrees with me here.

There have been a few exceptions, though. For instance, we carried this piece, because it was really funny and was an absolute spoof (not even satire based on an actual incident). Besides, we were just starting out and our friend who wrote this did not want to be named because he/she worked, works, will work for one or all of those spoofed.

We also carried a few pure data-based pieces that were done not by one person but jointly by two or three. They didn’t really come with an opinion or a ground report and there was no substantial non-data input, so we felt there was no disclosure required. We have refused to publish opinion pieces and reports that we received (and we received many) if the author did not want to be named.

We discussed this issue at length at Newslaundry (and on NL-Hafta too) and also put it to our subscribers. 67.2%  of our subscribers have voted that we do away with the blanket ban on anonymous pieces while 32.8% have supported the embargo. Weighing the pros and cons and deliberating on this at length we have decided that we will allow pseudonyms or anonymity on a case-by-case basis and it will be rare.

The filter will be that the editors must know who the person is and having spoken to him/her must be convinced that the reason to stay anonymous are reasonable. We will ensure that if there is a direct conflict of interest in the piece, we will not allow anonymity to hide that. Conflicts will be made clear. There will be editorial scrutiny to ensure motivated rants do not hide behind anonymity.

I’d like to thank all the subscribers who wrote in, voted, mailed and tweeted to us articulating their views. This is very helpful as it gives us some sort of compass to see if we are heading in the right direction. Newslaundry, after all, is a collaborative effort. We’re eternally grateful. This engagement with our subscribers will continue as we grow and evolve and set guidelines for ourselves. It’s a constant process. We’d also like to thank our non-subscribers for their tweets and mails. Your advice is precious but your subscription would be invaluable because – when the public pays, the public is served. Subscribe now.