When you post, which you are you?

The Masslive forums themselves are a topic for another day (er, night), but some recent exchanges on their Eastern Mass. boys basketball board got me thinking. More than a few writers post on the forums under something close to their real name (including me, "AJSmartschan"), and their identities are hardly hidden. Some have been drawn into argumentative discussions.

A message board devoted entirely to a single local high school sport is (clearly) populated entirely by fans of that single local high school sport. When part of a sports writer's job is to report on that particular game in that particular locality, his participation on the message board brings him into direct and sometimes confrontational contact with a relatively large and wholely concerned percentage of his readership.

The last thing we in the media need is the expansion of the public's general and largely understandable misunderstanding of us and our job. Thus, I believe writers need to interact with their readers in order to connect with them on the page and (perhaps more importantly) tear down some of the inherent mistrust that's been built up over the years. Opaqueness is self-defeating, and only makes a reporter's life harder. But is there a line? That is, is posting more than links to your own stories and those of your colleagues, scores and the like on a forum devoted exclusively to fans OK?

It's touchy. Opinionated discourse is one thing -- god knows there's enough of it on sports talk radio, pregame show X and postgame show Y -- but the relative anonymity of an unmoderated internet forum can lead to scary, scary things. What if other writers -- at least five of whom post on Masslive -- started posting in threads about "the best players in the state", or "the best team in Division 2 South"? What if one chimes in on a coach's offseason firing? When you're typing as "cforsberg" or "AJSmartschan", and not Chris Forsberg or Adam Smartschan, are you you? Are you you, the writer? Are you you, the sports fan? Content that appears in a paper or on its website can reasonably be judged to have been "approved" on some level by the organization; when a writer posts on a forum, it's unclear who he represents. Further, arguments on these kinds of boards escalate quickly. Someone who makes his living expressing himself through writing has to be especially careful to hold his tongue (fingers?), lest the quality of his real work be tinged.

Some groundrules all of us reporter-types would be better off following:

- Identify yourself; no good comes of a writer, editor or any other media professional posting anonymously.

- On the same note, be clear if you're posting personally or as a representative of your outlet. "Readers" are called that because they read stories and articles, not minds.

- Keep it positive and informative. I limit my Masslive posting to links to relevant pieces authored by me and other Ledger staffers and information asked for by others; a list of All-Scholastics, perhaps, or a team's record.

- There is no need to argue, fight or bicker online, ever. Doing so only (at best) reduces your personal readership and (at worse) harms the paper, magazine or website you represent.

Disclosure and interaction are both good things. Knowing how to keep one's decorum and professionalism intact is even better.

(And yes, I am aware of the fantastic potential irony of putting this entry on my personal blog. Key word here: personal. This is just me.)