Last week Koos Jansen “came out” (as in his identity, not
sexual identity) by publishing an interview he did with a
Netherlands newspaper on 9 April under his real name of Jan
Nieuwenhuijs. Is writing under a pseudonym shirking from taking
responsibility for your work, or just a safety measure to protect yourself
from nutters?
Probably the most famous anonymous writer(s) is Zero Hedge, who explained
their position in 2009 by arguing that not using their real names “turns
the conversation to the content, and away from the author, the author’s
biography” and should only be a problem “where the reader is
unwilling or unable to distinguish facts presented by the writer from
opinions expressed by the writer”. Admirable sentiments, although some
may argue that Zero Hedge has changed quite significantly since 2009, with
content now being subordinated to clicks.
The counter argument is that without any real reputation at stake, a
writer may be more careless with the truth – not a problem in the gold
blogosphere, however (I think a “LOL” is appropriate here).
I asked Jan/Koos why he initially decided to operate under an alias (FYI
“Koo” is a normal name in the Netherlands, like say a “Bruce”). He said that
he felt it would mean he would be more free to say whatever he wanted to say
and it would keep that completely separate from being a sound engineer. This
was also a factor for Australian blogger Bullion Baron, who
said that while he stands behind what he writes, “some of my views aren’t
popular and I prefer to minimise the risk they come back to bite me (e.g.
potential employer finding out of context comments using Google)”.
Warren James, who writes at the Screwtapefiles
group blog using his real name, sees it differently and he considers using
his real name as a positive for current and future employment as he gets
credit for his work (specifically the Bullion Bars Database). He said it also makes him more
accountable and forces him to double check his work.
In my case, when I started my personal blog in 2008 I thought it was “important to disclose any
potential “agendas” or commercial interests because while in theory one
should be able to assess the validity of an argument independent of the
writer, full disclosure helps the reader to be vigilant”. I also thought
in practice that it would constrain my writing to have to constantly think
whether something in my writing would “give me away”.
While being anonymous gives you more freedom to speak your mind, it
doesn’t save you from being attacked personally by trolls and nutters, which
is a general problem on the internet. In the case of precious metals, for
those advocating self storage anonymity is probably essential lest someone
try and find out where you live.
When Jan Nieuwenhuijs started his In Gold We Trust blog in 2013 he said he
didn’t know it would gain the popularity it did, or that he would be
able to make a living out of it (Jan quit sound engineering work at the end
of 2014 when he started writing for Bullion Star professionally). Often the
choice of a pseudonym is made without consideration of the future. As an
example, consider the case of Craig Hemke, who runs the TF Metals Report. No doubt he
considered his choice of “Turd Ferguson” as nothing more than a funny alias
to use for commenting on Zero Hedge, without any expectation that it
would lead to his own paid website. While in Craig has noted “how few interviews I do? It’s because so few
want to have someone named Turd as their guest”, he still posts under
the Turd alias as its “brand” recognition is just too strong.
Jan feels that same branding problem, as all his work to-date is under the
Koos name. He’d rather use his real name, but how to transition? My
suggestion: dual brand for a while, like Nissan did when it phased out the
Datsun brand – write as Jan “Koos” Nieuwenhuijs for six months and then
just drop the “Koos”.
