Ummm... Dr. Boaz is a political science professor? And she's complaining about anonymous political speech? In America?
Is she not familiar with the Federalist Papers, the quintessential anonymous political writings that predate the nation itself?
Perhaps this will ring a bell:
"Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society." McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n (93-986), 514 U.S. 334 (1995).
Just guessing, but it seems rather likely that Dr. Boaz' objections are partisan rather than ethical.
Re: “Campaign Veil”
Ummm... Dr. Boaz is a political science professor? And she's complaining about anonymous political speech? In America?
Is she not familiar with the Federalist Papers, the quintessential anonymous political writings that predate the nation itself?
Perhaps this will ring a bell:
"Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society." McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n (93-986), 514 U.S. 334 (1995).
Just guessing, but it seems rather likely that Dr. Boaz' objections are partisan rather than ethical.