It is little wonder that professional journalists are increasingly publishing their work on their personal weblogs than in the media for which they work. Most journalists take pride in their reports and have the interests of their audiences - in preference to those of their interview subjects - at heart. They are credited for their work with bylines - the tags below stories to identify the author.

Along with credit for a story, bylines also apportion responsibility and hold journalists accountable for their articles and the impact they have on the audience and on the people and companies they feature. This is an important tool to ensure fairness and objectivity. Journalists cannot hide and make allegations under the cover of anonymity.

But while journalists were content with the credit and responsibility bylines bring with them, they can be more trouble than they are worth. There are pros and cons for journalists in having them.

Pros:

1. Readers recognise you for your work.
2. Before long you will develop a following among readers who track your articles.
3. You become a trusted source for honest stories, and in time, your word might just become gospel.

Cons:

1. Investor relations or corporate communications personnel recognise you for your work.
2. They will also track your articles.
3. And you become a trusted source for disruptive stories, and in time, your word might just keep you off their invite lists.

Being targeted like this is one reason for the rise in the number of online journals, more commonly known as weblogs, or blogs for short. Bloggers - people who keep these journals - do not mince their words because they are not accountable to an editor or an employer. And they do not need to write anonymously to produce valuable, well-researched commentary. On the contrary. Writing anonymously draws their credibility into question. But their independence alone provides freedom which they would not enjoy working for a media organisation.

Likewise, sources are often more comfortable conveying information to an independent writer than a journalist with a media organisation. And that is how The Insider received a lead that we are pursuing in the next edition.

How did we get this lead?

Well, we blogged and you responded.

Our source for this story replied to our log about the company, suggesting we dig deeper.

So subscribing to the popular saying “where there's smoke, there’s fire,” I am about to find out what this person knows that I don’t.

Watch for my byline.