Furthermore, I absolutely agree that there must be some system for anonymous commenting somewhere else. Your proposal of letting the reporter or the editor be that protection, is absolutely a good one.

There will always be forums and medias that operates with other and wider rules of engagement.

Personally I’ve never understood the point of allowing anonymous commenting.

The way I see it, the need for anonymous comments boils down to two basic things:

1. so that people can protect their identity, and
2. so that commenting is effortless, and people will do it

My argument is that #1 can be accomplished in non-public forums (i.e. identify yourself to the journalist, and let them protect your identity), and #2 can be accomplished, technologically, without allowing for an identity free-for-all.

But you’re right that more important than the technology is the attitude and participation of journalists.

Furthermore, I absolutely agree that there must be some system for anonymous commenting somewhere else. Your proposal of letting the reporter or the editor be that protection, is absolutely a good one.

There will always be forums and medias that operates with other and wider rules of engagement.

The way I see it, the need for anonymous comments boils down to two basic things:

1. so that people can protect their identity, and
2. so that commenting is effortless, and people will do it

My argument is that #1 can be accomplished in non-public forums (i.e. identify yourself to the journalist, and let them protect your identity), and #2 can be accomplished, technologically, without allowing for an identity free-for-all.

But you're right that more important than the technology is the attitude and participation of journalists.