Skip to content

Lantern Editor Deletes Reddit Account After Identity Exposed

Anonymous attacks on a competitor backfired when posts revealed The Lantern editor behind them.

Screenshot of Reddit’s “This user has deleted their account” page, featuring mascot Snoo standing in front of a broken stone arch.
Image: Reddit account deletion screen. © Reddit Inc. Used under fair use for editorial purposes.
Published:

On January 2, 2026, I received a Reddit notification that was a bit odd.

It was a comment on my Reddit post about Ohio State's administration flagging me for filing records requests. Here's what it said, in full:

The "student journalist" who wrote this piece also threw a temper tantrum at a USG meeting because they didn't elect him in the senate. He is also not a communications OR journalism major, and harasses news outlets to publish his articles. This kid does not take no for an answer ever. I don't know whether he's in the right or not here, but take everything he says with a grain of salt and entitlement.

This wouldn't be remarkable on its own. Reddit is full of anonymous hot takes, and journalists, especially ones covering contentious topics, get their share of criticism.

But, as I would soon find out, this wasn't any ordinary Redditor.

The Unmasking

Other posts from the same account offered clues to the commenter's identity.

In one thread, since deleted, the user identified themselves as "a managing editor for The Lantern."

Screenshot of a Reddit post in the r/OSU subreddit titled “Seeking comic panel artists.”  The post is authored by user ProfessionalBox2256 and labeled with a “Help” tag. The author states they are a managing editor for The Lantern and are looking to re-incorporate comic strips and visual arts into the publication. They explain that comics are less popular than in the past and that they are seeking interested students on campus to contribute, inviting readers to direct message them.  An edited section notes that the position would likely be unpaid, as paid positions for the year may already have been filled. The author adds that contributors could work as freelancers at their desired frequency, and that paid positions might be possible in the future if there is sufficient interest, though this is not guaranteed.

In another, the user referred to themselves by the name Grayson.

A user named ProfessionalBox2256 responds to a question: “How did you decide on a forever name?”  Their comment reads:  “I went with Gray and eventually changed it to Grayson because I aligned with that more."
Extraneous portions of the comment have been redacted for lack of relevance.

Putting two and two together: the comments appear to have been written by Grayson Newbourn, one of the paper's current managing editors.

On January 2, I sent a formal request for comment to The Lantern's managing editors and faculty advisors regarding the Reddit comments.

Between January 2 and January 4, the posts that explicitly identified the user as a Lantern managing editor were scrubbed from the profile.

On January 4, I sent a follow-up noting I had preserved screenshots of all posts. Shortly after, the entire Reddit account was deleted.

When offered the chance to confirm or deny the author's identity, The Lantern's managing editors chose silence. Instead of clarifying, they chose deletion.

A managing editor anonymously criticized coverage of a story The Lantern had not reported, and when questioned, the response was erasure.

An Editorial Breach

On its own, the Reddit comment might look like a one-off criticism. But the manner in which it was delivered crosses a clear ethical line.

Editors are entitled to personal opinions. What they're not entitled to do is use accounts previously deployed for Lantern business to anonymously attack competitors while concealing their affiliation.

The same Reddit account had previously been used to solicit submissions for The Lantern. When it came time to disparage a competitor, there was no disclosure whatsoever.

There’s something revealing in the comment itself: "I don't know whether he's in the right or not here, but take everything he says with a grain of salt and entitlement."

Without bothering to evaluate the article on its merits, the managing editor still felt compelled to dismiss it wholesale.

As for the "temper tantrum": The Lantern covered what actually happened at that October USG meeting. Readers are encouraged to be their own judge.

The Credentials Card

Finally, there's the credentials argument: "He is also not a communications OR journalism major."

This argument assumes the validity of reporting depends on credentials, not accuracy or rigor. That people without formal training have no business holding power accountable.

The question isn't whether someone has the right credentials. The question is whether their work is accurate and well-sourced.

When I initially pitched my November piece on USG budget oversight to The Lantern, Managing Editor Davis Beatty stated the piece couldn't be accepted without disclosures for conflicts of interest.

If Beatty's concerned about conflicts of interest, perhaps she should start by addressing those in her own newsroom.


As of publication, The Lantern's managing editors have not responded to my January 2 request for comment. If they wish to issue a statement, Generally Assembled will publish it in full.

Update: Screenshots have been further redacted to remove personal information irrelevant to the story. I apologize if the original screenshots caused any distress, my intent was solely to hold editors accountable for comments made through accounts used for Lantern business.

Tags: Politics

More in Politics

See all

More from Mason Bindemann

See all