The truthiness of "Baghdad Burning"

Unfortunately, I am stuck working in Baker Center all weekend, so I don't have a chance to see any of the films of the festival. Instead, I only have our reading assignments for my entertainment. Lucky for me, I found "Baghdad Burning" immensely interesting. As I was reading it, I thought a lot about truthfulness (or "truthiness," as Stephen Colbert would say) of the Internet.

I first wondered, why is Riverbend anonymous? In her "About Riverbend" post on August 24th, 2003, Riverbend says she "must" remain anonymous, otherwise, she wouldn't "feel free" to write. Why doesn't she "feel free" to write without hiding behind her anonymity? All her blog says is the apparent "average" opinion of Iraqi citizens, then what makes what she says dangerous or controversial? I thought it was interesting that she didn't go into detail why she couldn't tell readers her name. Especially after the blog became popular and published, why wouldn't she want to have a chance to make money off her blog if she could?

That also brings me to the issue of the publication of her blog in print. "Baghdad Burning" seems like another critical violation of standards and ethics in the media surrounding the Iraq War. No one has any proof of Riverbends identity, yet her blogs are published and assumed true. In fact, the introduction is written by an "investigative journalist" named James Ridgeway, whom didn't even think to research if Riverbend was truly who she said she was.

All I'm saying is, if Riverbend is truly a 20-something former computer programmer from Iraq, then her insight is valuable and enlightening. Until I have proof, however, I will continue to be skeptical of her blog.

Oh, and why is it so hard to find out who Riverbend is? I would think this information would've been leaked out by now.