Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Politician Stalks Blogger – Rep. Mike Doogan Outs AKMuckraker

Alaska Democratic Representative Mike Doogan didn’t like the attention of blogger AKMuckraker – proprietor of The Mudflats Blog and a person who had become internationally famous as a source of local commentary and information regarding Governor Sarah Palin – so he chose to stalk this blogger and publicly expose her real name.

Photobucket

This, in my opinion, is a of breach of trust – not to mention an example of immature and vindictive behavior – which is so fundamental that it raises serious question as to whether Rep. Doogan should hold public office.

Here is the letter sent this morning to MudFlats uers such as myself:

Hi everyone,

You may recall that some time ago Rep Mike Doogan was sending some crazy emails to people who emailed him and AKMuckraker was one of the bloggers involved in exposing his craziness.

Apparently this did not sit well with Rep Doogan. He has been trying to find out who AKMuckraker was for several months now and he has finally managed to do it. He then sent out a message to people on his mailing list via his official legislative newsletter, advising them of the real name of AKMuckraker.

Whether or not people support AKMuckrakers opinions, it seems most people support her right to remain anonymous. We feel it is a right that everyone on the internet is entitled to – people make the decision for their own reasons, some because they have been cyber stalked in the past, some to prevent being cyber-stalked in the future.

This may be the first known case of an anonymous blogger being cyber-stalked by a politician determined to find out their real identity and out them, though!

http://www.themudflats.net/200…

We are not certain at this stage but it is possible that Rep Doogan has broken the law, and there may be legal action that AKMuckraker can take. Whether or not AKMuckraker chooses to do that is another question and one I am sure she will consider this carefully over the coming days.

You can read posts from bloggers on this subject via the following links –

Progressive Alaska

Shannyn Moore

The Immoral Minority

Mama Dance

Palingates

Think Alaska

We Are Not That Stupid

We also have a thread on this on the forums, where you can feel free to add your comments.

http://www.themudflats.net/for…

Updates and possible calls for action will be posted in that thread, so make sure to check it regularly. We will also try and keep up with links to posts on the subject – and possibly media stories.

You may find it difficult to access the mudflats blog and forums over the next few days – especially if the mainstream media pick up this story – until we move them to a server with a larger capacity. This will cost us around $200 a month but we feel that the demand for accessing the sites over the next few weeks will make it difficult for the usual mudflats readers to keep up to date, so we are biting the bullet and hoping that people will assist with donations.

You can donate to AKMuckraker via the paypal buttons found on both the blog and the forums.

You can also email messages of support to AKMuckraker at akmuckraker@yahoo.com – be aware that a lot of people are doing so at the moment so you may not get a reply but we feel it is important to let AKMuckraker know that she is supported.

Regards,

Snoskred

On behalf of The Mudflats Team.

http://www.themudflats.net/for…

Many of you may be aware that I am an advocate of Verified Identity in the political blogosphere.  Verified Identity would be a set of mechanisms (which as yet do not exist) that would provide bloggers with the ability to prove that they are real individuals (such as using a driver’s license) and not sockpuppets.  This would not necessarily be the same as using real names (though I encourage that as well), and even using this approach the real names of bloggers who choose to be publicly anonymous would be protected.  Further, I would suggest that even on a theoretical blog where Verified Identity was implemented that truly anonymous users could still be allowed and readers could choose to view or not view these comments.

Regardless, AKMuckRaker is the proprietor of MudFlats and had chosen to maintain her own anonymity, a choice that has been negated by an elected official run, ahem, “amuck”.  Rep. Doogan should face the strongest public scrutiny by his constituents, at the very least, legal consequences if at all possible and perhaps seek psychological counseling.  


Categories: Uncategorized.

/ 62 Comments

62 comments

  1. the national gadfly

    this kind of neocon, nazi abuse of the system is exactly what is wrong with our country.  michelle bachmann and her uberstrumpetfuhrer mindset calling for revolution are part and parcel with this crap.

    here comes the ‘night of long knives’ v20., if these assmuffins ever get their way.

    bye-bye Doogan and take your membership to the NRA with you!

    -gadfly

  2. John Allen

    On the one hand, we have a long history of anonymous pamphleteers in this country. On the other hand, why should someone be able to attack someone else while remaining anonymous? What if there was someone who hid their identity that was attacking you? Would you be so gung ho about protecting their anonymity?

  3. daMamma

    Many of us that post or have blogs do so under a pseudonym or pen name if you will.  We do so for many reasons, mainly of course to keep our privacy.  Our safety.  This is the world of the internet, once done it is there forever.  Never to be taken back, never to be hidden again.

    What AK Rep. Mike Doogan (D) did to AKMuckraker is reprehensible, irresponsible, childish, foolish, vindictive and downright stupid.  How dare he decide to take it upon himself to choose who can and who cannot remain anonymous.  It was not for him to decide whether or not AKM could maintain her private information as private or take that information and make it public knowledge.

    The damage has been done.  Her name is known.  This leaves her, her children and family vulnerable to the whims of the unknown private citizens who may disagree with her opinions so passionately as to cause physical or emotional harm to her or her family.

    Shame, shame, shame on Mr. Doogan.

  4. canadian gal

    does raise an interesting conundrum.  on one hand mudflats deserves the anonymity they wish – but on the other i guess if one is being attacked and chooses to find the source and expose it that is also just…  so im not sure what i think here.

    what kind of blows my mind is – isnt’ this dude a democrat???  alaska is a bit nutty huh?

  5. John Allen

    bloggers deserve anonymity. Should we do away with caller ID so people are free to make anonymous phone calls? If not, why not? And, what is the difference?

  6. Reaper0bot0

    At least partially.  I haven’t forgotten that.  I never willingly disclosed my name, even my first name.  A blogger should be able to remain anonymous if (s)he chooses.

  7. alyssa chaos

    Im not sure what laws, if any apply to this type of thing. But the whole thread brought up some good points for both sides of the argument.

    My whole deal is that Rep. Doogan was pursuing a personal/political vendetta when he was supposed to be serving his constituents. That’s the bottom line. Im sure Alaskans dont pay this guy to obsess about a blogger.

    If I were running against this guy I’d frame it that way.

    Wouldn’t it be hella crazy if we find out he used state resources to find her real name, or even if he used his office computer/phone, those technically belong to the taxpayer; It would be hilarious, in the political disaster sense. I should win some kind of prize [a unicorn] if it does turn out to be the case.

  8. Bear Woman

    Sorry folks, I am going to jump in on this one.

    First, and to me foremost, Doogan is an elected official.  His outing was done on his legislative e-newsletter and is on the state legislative website.  He didn’t like receiving e-mails from those outside his legislative district (even from other Alaskans) encouraging pursuit of the legislative ethics investigation of Governor Palin and decided to seek revenge because his unprofessional responses were commented upon on Mudflats.

    Second, if he has such an objection to Anonymous bloggers, why has he NOT published the names of all Anonymous bloggers in Alaska — or better yet, introduced legislation banning it?  

    Third, being an Alaskan — I full well realize the importance of anonymity!  The current climate in Alaska does not allow for voices of dissent in many places.  Currently, if you disagree with some elected officials you have been “blacklisted” from getting contracts, have had jobs threatened for doing them — i.e., the requirment of open records statutes and contracting law — and been harrassed by supporters of these officials.

    This particular blog has done a fair job in moderating, discouraging, and stopping speculative statements and accusations. Many of us who read it “walk away” when the conjecture starts regarding parentage of children, etc.

    I do not know much about anonymous blogging.  I do know that I can send a message to an Alaska politician without having to use my name.  If I make threats, slander someone, etc., then appropriate civil and criminal actions can and will be taken against me (as well they should).

    Regarding “free speech” between individuals — that is a different matter.  Hateful speech, such as “kill him” should not be acceptable in any form.  Speech meant to harm — i.e. resulting in loss of job, income, housing, etc. — is not appropriate.  

    But most importantly in this case, that was not the context.  This was done by an elected official through his official e-newsletter.      

  9. librarygrape

    Check out the new post I just wrote at http://www.librarygrape.com/20… .

    I just received a response from one of the four members of the Alaska legislature’s Select Committee on Legislative Ethics, Rep. Berta Gardner:

    Thank you for your letter. I’m not happy with Doogan right now and think his action was unnecessary and destructive. I don’t believe, however, that it is a violation of legislative ethics as described here:

    http://www.touchngo.com/lglcnt…

    Surely someone has or will file an ethics complaint and the committee will investigate and make a determination.

    Berta

Comments are closed.