Over the weekend I got bored and decided to spend a bit of time doing some sleuthing.
As blogged previously, a person by the name of Apexnerd had posted edited video clips in support of the four progressive County Council candidates as well as Democrat Michael McAuley for Port commissioner.
I had relayed what I knew at the time. Apex supported those candidates and was allegedly 41, according to the profile. That person came on here later and confirmed their age. But I still wasn’t sure who they were.
Like I said, I got a bit bored and decided to figure out who this person was. I decided to wait until today so I could fully confirm it (though I pretty much had it Saturday).
Apexnerd would be Shane Roth, who posted Dan McShane’s television ad on his YouTube account and is now listed on McShane’s new C4 campaign expenditures information as having provided an in-kind contribution to McShane to film and do the campaign ad prep in the amount of $800. Roth, according to Secretary of State voter database records, is 41.
Roth also happened to be mentioned here the other day when he spoke at the Whatcom County Council’s public comment period chastising Councilman Sam Crawford for using his iPhone during meetings. The 41-year-old is also married to Wendy Harris, the campaign treasurer for Laurie Caskey-Schreiber, according to Auditor’s Office, Secretary of State and Public Disclosure Commission records.
So there you go, everyone, the mystery is solved.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Sam, this may be a silly question; but aren’t anonymous commenters on your blog entitled to remain anonymous?
Is this situation different because Apexnerd also has his own blog?
I’m confused.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Larry - yes, this situation is different. Apexnerd/Shane Roth made public statements and sent out public videos, and provided in-kind support to a candidate for this election cycle and people deserve to know who that person is.
I was already looking into who this person was before they came on and commented on this blog, though didn’t spend as much time on it until this weekend because I was swamped.
The anonymous moniker Mr. Roth used was not started for this blog, it was started for his YouTube account.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Thanks Sam. I was getting nervous you might find out who I really am.
October 27th, 2009 at 12:07 PM
So Shane did a commercial for McShane? That has a certain ring to it.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:12 PM
I’m confused. So, if an anonymous commenter makes public statements at a Council meeting, you will list their name?
Or, if they are listed as a contributor to a campaign?
None of this pertains to me, because I comment under my own name, but I would think other anonymous commenters might be alarmed if this is the Politics blog policy.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Elisabeth - I was sleuthing out who Apexnerd was before he ever commented here. This is a case-by-case situation, obviously. In this case, Mr. Roth also commented here as Apexnerd after I reported about the YouTube videos, but the pseudonym was attached to a YouTube account prior to that … not to this blog.
As I’ve stated on here before, anonymous commenters are protected. However, Mr. Roth was a campaign contributor initially using a pseudonym somewhere else but was required to be listed on C4 reports, and I think it’s the public’s right to know who is contributing what.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:11 PM
I don’t have a problem with you reporting Roth’s identity as the person who is listed on a C-4. If he provided a contribution to a campaign, it needs to be reported. And, it was.
And I respect your decision to identify Roth as the guy who publicly criticized Sam Crawford’s obsessive use of his I-pod during meetings. Even I find that offensive.
Elected officials are paid to represent us. They may not agree with the citizens who are testifying before them, but they should at least extend those citizens a measure of respect while they are speaking.
But why identify Roth’s anonymous moniker on this site, regardless of where it originated?
Will you allow him to take another anonymous name?
October 27th, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Elisabeth - I will indeed allow Mr. Roth to take another name if he so chooses.
But I believe I’ve already made it clear why I identified him. He used the anonymous name on the YouTube account before he ever commented here and I was already looking into it before he commented here. I had no control over him commenting here (well, technically, I did, but I welcome the comments).
I assume you’re protecting a friend, but I believe my reasoning is sound. I did my job.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:31 PM
I was patrolling the county in my Nerdmobile, when I noticed someone put up the Nerd Signal.
So, my identity has been revealed.
Fortunately, Mr Taylor has kept confidential the location of the Nerd Cave.
P.S. Larry Horowitz’s real name is…
Harry Lorowitz.
(That’s right, “Larry”, if I’m going down, I’m taking you with me!)
October 27th, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Foiled again
October 27th, 2009 at 5:22 PM
OK, Harry and Apexnerd are completely hilarious!
October 28th, 2009 at 12:53 AM
Wow! Pretty impressive detective work, Sam.
BTW, I really enjoyed Shane’s videos.
Kudos to you both, and keep up the good work, guys!
October 28th, 2009 at 9:06 AM
Who’s Harry Lorowitz?
And where’s the link to his video?
October 28th, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Sam,
Weird. I posted another comment yesterday, but it didn’t appear on this thread.
I”m not attempting to protect a friend. The above post demonstrates that Shane is quite capable of looking out for himself!
I do worry about protecting the anonymous identity of other commenters on the Herald site.
If I can recognize certain individuals on Herald comment pages, so can others. And, I am very aware that other commenters are also working on campaigns and making financial contributions to candidates (on both sides). But you are not naming them. Yet…
So, why is it important to disclose Shane’s identity, but not someone else? Is it because he’s new to the area?
October 28th, 2009 at 4:23 PM
ok, Sam isn’t going to answer me.
For those who are reading these comments — there are two other local you tube video artists who have posted political videos anonymously on you tube over the last two years. I have posted a number of them on my blogs, but they were not produced by Shane Roth.
Shane, your 2009 LWV videos are refreshingly humorous and I sincerely hope that you continue to produce them, even if your name was published in the Herald.
It’s nice to have a new source of local political humor!
Keep up the good work!
October 28th, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Elisabeth - first, I didn’t see your initial comment, so I’m sorry. I don’t see comments the same way all of you do. I see every single comment from every single post in chronological order, so sometimes I might miss one. My bad.
Second, I thought it was important to identify Mr. Roth because he was doing something noteworthy that local political junkies were interested in discussing and also provided actual hard support to a candidate that was reported to the PDC. I honestly probably wouldn’t have named Mr. Roth on here if it weren’t for the official contribution, because the other videos weren’t super-widely disseminated and wouldn’t be something that I might write about for print. It just didn’t rise to that level. But Mr. Roth’s in-kind contribution forwarded the the issue a bit more and I thought it was completely appropriate to follow-up by noting who not only did those initial videos, but created Dan McShane’s campaign ad.
As I already said, how any journalist determines what to cover, who to cover and how to cover and issue is done on a case-by-case basis. I do my best to be fair and accurate and assess myriad possibilities before reporting, though of course I’m not perfect and I’m only human. Like before, other commenters posted on here with pseudonyms for the sake of commenting. Mr. Roth’s moniker was used on a YouTube account prior to him ever commenting here and so I believe the situation to be different. Again, I have never outed any anonymous commenter here, but this situation is different in my opinion as a news reporter.
As to Mr. Roth being new to the area I have no idea why that would matter to my coverage. First, I don’t care, and second, I’m not from this area, either and have only lived here for three years. That is odd speculation.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Annnnd one more thing: I do my best always, and I believe I do it more than any other journalist at this newspaper, to answer any and every question that people pose to me. I do it because I think it’s important to engage the public about the work I do, so they know I’m not some robot monkey in China. I’m here on the ground and working to provide factually-accurate information to Whatcom County residents and I care about being as transparent as possible in how I go about covering things.
Sometimes, of course, people drag out a conversation and it gets tedious, so I will never guarantee I’m going to continue a conversation forever simply so someone can needle me for the sake of it.