Should we end a taboo in Letters to the Editor?

Created with the Midjourney AI

I didn't see this coming, but it turns out a bunch of people who have written letters to the editor have received anonymous notes in response, mailed to their homes.

Some felt intimidated and stopped writing letters as a result, they told me in response to last week's column about an anonymous letter received at the home of a 10-year-old letter writer.

As I wrote that column, I kept wondering whether we should publish letters from people who want to be anonymous. The response to the column (Thanks to all who wrote) revved up that thinking.

In particular, I received a thoughtful note from someone who advocates for anonymous letters. He described visiting The Plain Dealer years ago and meeting with editors about ways to improve the paper. He said his suggestion for using anonymous letters brought an audible gasp "as the air was sucked out of the room." The editor at the time said the idea was insane, which ended the topic, with no discussion, debate or explanation. "I was just wrong... so wrong that there was no need for explanation of logic."

But he said he had reasons for wanting to be anonymous. For part of his life, he worked in professional environments where public expressions of opinion could derail progress up the ladder. Later, when he was in academia, expressing anything other than the liberal view would jeopardize tenure. He had things to say, but he could not say them without potentially harming his livelihood.

"I am afraid to have my name associated with anything I might write for the PD or anyone else. I don't want wild-eyed Trump supporters or wild-eyed Sanders supporters threatening me or my family. But why should that fact that I'm a coward keep me from expressing opinions."

He makes a good argument. We are champions on the First Amendment here, and it protects anonymous speech. Case in point: We've been quite vocal in our criticism of Beachwood over using tax dollars to try to unmask anonymous critics of the thin-skinned police chief. A judge rightfully and forcefully spiked that move, which likely is an illegal use of tax dollars, anyway. The judge said clearly that anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment.

Anonymous speech has played an important role in this nation's history.

Common Sense is the influential pamphlet by Thomas Paine that persuaded a large portion of the population of the 13 colonies to think about independence from England. It might still have the record for the largest circulation of any book in American history in proportion to the population of the country at the time. It was widely distributed and read aloud at bars. We might not be the nation we are without it.

It was published anonymously.

Likewise, the Federalist essays by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison were published without the authors' names. These were critical to defining our democracy.

Our "Letters to the Editor" forum is unique in Northeast Ohio in that it brings together the sentiments of people from all stripes, and it is read by people from the far reaches of the political spectrum and everywhere in between. Some letters are among the most-read pieces of content we publish on cleveland.com.

With other forums, such as social media, people largely talk to people who think like they do, with no opposing viewpoints. They serve as echo chambers, not places for intelligent conversation.

With our forum so important, then, are we doing the region a disservice by omitting perspectives from those who wish anonymity? Is it not the thought that counts?

Times have changed since the suggestion of accepting anonymous letters caused an audible gasp by editors. The nation is polarized to the point of paralysis. Elected leaders bent on destroying democracy exhort their followers to violence. Everyone, it seems, has a gun. We see crazed people, swayed by those exhortations, striking out almost every day, which frightens many from speaking out and drawing attention to themselves.

In some ways, we are back to that Colonial era, when gerrymandering and politicians drunk with power are treating the American people the way King George treated the colonies. We might need a new version of Common Sense to rally all of us to bring democracy back to the fore and oust those who wish to become our lords and masters.

But if the writer of that new version of Common Sense would need anonymity, as Paine did, our policy would thwart that. Maybe the time has come to welcome anonymous letters, to ensure that everyone has a seat at the table.

We've been talking about the efforts for civil discourse this year. Wouldn't ensuring that we hear from people who fear reprisals be a step in that direction?

I could go into the arguments against this or outline the guardrails we could use to weed out lobbyists or companies, but I’m certain you’ll do that. This would be a big decision for us, and we try not to make decisions without asking readers for their thoughts. Please write me with yours.

I’m at cquinn@cleveland.com.

Thanks for reading.