Palin's Deceptions blogger "Audrey," in her first post dated Sept. 15, 2008, began a discussion of the bizarre Trig-Truther theory this way:
"In my labor coaching and childbirth experience . . ."So, from Day One, "Audrey" offered her professional expertise in support of this speculation that Trig was not actually Sarah Palin's child. And it was not merely her own expertise that she cited:
As has been stated so many other places, it is incomprehensible that a doctor would not have told Gov. Palin to go to a hospital immediately and get checked out. . . . (Or, as my physician husband has quipped: "I must have missed that day in medical school.") (Emphasis added.)Now, I wish to raise a question in blog ethics: When an anonymous blogger claims a special expertise in a field, so as to support a particular line of personal attack on a public figure, has that blogger thereby made her own real-life identity a matter relevant to the discussion?
This is not strictly a hypothetical question. IYKWIMAITYD.
Given that there is an actual answer involved -- that "Audrey" is in fact a flesh-and-blood human being whose identity can be discovered -- what I'm wondering is how best to share that answer.
Would readers prefer that I adopt the favorite mode of Trig-Truthers? "Just asking questions," as they say.
Please feel free to comment. I've got 28 browser windows open, and must start compiling the next post before I crash my laptop. Guess who else may be interested?
UPDATE 4 p.m.: "Who is 'AnnieB393'?" Remember, "Just asking questions."