Though faced with legal action from his/her apparent home town, datruthsquad didn't go to ground today.

Good citizens rarely do, and as a result I see the anonymous blogger's refusal to be intimidated as another indication that he is simply a good citizen speaking to power the things power is unhappy to hear.

His/her blog's time stamp says he was at the keyboard early Thursday morning, castigating his New Jersey town fathers was wasting a good deal of money on his pursuit and analyzing the contradictory statements of their legal counsel.

Certainly I believe the overarching issue is his right to say his civil piece in the prose style of his choosing, and to do so without harassment. I agree with the Electronic Frontier Foundation that the right to measure of anonymity is required for the exercise of freedom of speech.

Or as datruthsquad morning's post asserts:

Da actions of da Manalapan Township Committee should place anyone with an opinion on notice, that this could happen to them if they stand up and tell da truth, or even worse, just disagree with a politician. DaTruthSquad, for one, will not be idle and allow Freedom of Speech, da right of every American, to be tossed in da garbage.
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy once said, "The First Amendment is often inconvenient. But that is besides the point. Inconvenience does not absolve the government of its obligation to tolerate speech." Apparently, certain members of da Manalapan Township Committee wouldn't know Justice Kennedy if they fell over him.
And that's daTruth.

Whether all of datruthsquad's other views are holy write or not matters little. This touch of anonymity is fundamental to what we regard as freedom. For without it, the relatively powerless among us are constantly vulnerable to the muzzles power can fashion for them.

Unless we all intend to lose the attendant freedoms, we would I think do well to stand up for this anonymous blogger.

Anonymity is an important choice.

His, mine and yours, if we can keep it.

_____________________________________

              

Looking for well-balanced coverage of the Writers Guild of America strike, I kept tripping over attempts to substitute sly sneers for good journalism.

Even the New York Times seems somewhat convinced that hand-wringing about a temporary cessation in prime-time melodrama is a substitute for well-verified information about the issues.

As variously indicated by those who sneer, the screen writers aren't coal miners. Nor are they either spinning mill workers or truck drivers.

Yes, and the fundamental issue is still fair pay for work done.

As is usually the case, corporate management believes "less is more." To wit, less for the screenwriters is more for them.

Oh, and no top management doesn't care if screenwriters in the surplus labor pool (not currently employed) lose their health insurance, their homes, or worse.

The screen writers do a clear, straightforward and entertaining job of explaining their issues in the video Why we fight.

Just hit the play button the middle of the screen:

If after careful consideration you share my view that they're right, stop crossing the picket line so often.

Don't wait for your favorite shows to run out of pre-strike copy.

If you can't go cold turkey, I know you're tough enough to turn the television set off after the news and stay away from Web downloads of prime-time shows until after the studios reach an appropriate agreement with the screen writers.