It's clearly a moot point pointing a finger at anonymous in the first place, as you're essentially pointing into open space and asking for handcuffs.
What irritates me is that these "press releases" beg for us, as an audience and a consumer base, to give them all the benefits of being anonymous and ignore the disadvantages.
As a philosophy, I will appreciate "it" for standing up for what "it" believes in...eg, boycotting, rallying, freedom of speech and internet, etc.
But when "it" is very, very clearly associated with something that is causing me, the consumer, an inconvenience, then I will expect whoever is representing "it" to take blame.
Again, I say that these press releases are, if not a contradiction to what "it" embodies, simply annoying and tacky, but when the representatives of Anon plead for me to ignore them and fight the real enemy (Sony, in this case) like some fucking Sinead O'Conner, they can go fuck themselves.
Three entities deserve blame in this:
Sony,
The unidentified hacking sphere,
and those who decided to take Anonymous as an ideology and a symbol and hoist it upon their flagpole in a war against Sony.
It needs to be reiterated: I'm not going to loathe anyone in a Guy Fawkes mask from now on, but those making these very specific public statements and claiming to be under said Umbrella term will be met with disdain from me, personally.
We should understand that to dislike Anonymous itself is missing the point entirely. But I'll be damned if whoever's writing these statements isn't no less of a potential snake in the grass than those they're citing in their sources.
