Anonymous
by Katie • Jul 20th, 2008 at 9:08 pm • 11 comments
In high school, my (crazy) AP English teacher insisted that we write our full names on all course evaluations. We were “women of integrity,” our school motto, and anonymous comments were beneath us.
I had a conversation with Brenda Kay about anonymous posting to websites. We are both infuriated by rude comments, often devoid of substance, that are posted to sites like the Daily Illini and Urbanagora by “Anonymous” authors.
First Amendment rights certainly guarantee a freedom to express opinions, and standards of journalistic integrity protect anonymity, but to what extent can we respect a person’s opinion when they refuse to embrace it as their own? And, in the cyberworld where everyone is a stranger, does name recognition even matter?
Our discussion eventually came to the question of whether or not anonymity should be protected by blogs, newspapers, or the law. A phenomenon called Juicy Campus has recently swept college campuses, and it makes me wonder. Contributors, if you can even call them that, post comments about people they dislike. It gets pretty messy; posts use full names, disclose phone numbers and addresses, and smear reputations. The posting is completely anonymous, leaving little recourse for victims to defend against false attacks.
Similarly, most blogs and many newspaper websites allow readers to comment on stories with invented names or no names at all. I understand that, at times, identity must be protected to avoid conflicts of interest. It’s a whole different story when people use anonymity as a cloak for ignorance and tactlessness.
My English teacher may have been crazy, but her point still stands. Is anonymity cowardly?
Comment by Arbitrista on 21 July 2008 at 7:28 am:
Regrettably, we don’t live in a society in which one can express oneself without fear of repercussions – particularly from employers. Without anonymity or pseudonymity, a lot of us would be locked out of the public sphere.
Comment by Brian on 21 July 2008 at 8:04 am:
It seems to me that the real problem is the CONTENT of anonymous contributions rather than the fact of anonymity. There’s probably a correlation between worthless, rude comments and anonymity, but honestly, it’s not like those of us who use consistent names are above that sort of thing from time to time ourselves. In any case, an anonymous commenter could make a perfectly worthy, thoughtful contribution which would be no less valuable as a result of that commenter’s anonymity.
I do think it’s easier if somebody is going to be a regular commenter for them to pick a consistent name by which they call themselves, whether real or pseudonymous, so that other readers can develop an identity of that person and put their comments in a broader context. Other than that, doesn’t bother me if somebody doesn’t want to develop a record of potentially embarrassing quotes with his or her name on them.
Comment by Joshua on 21 July 2008 at 9:28 am:
Anonymity reduces credibility. I don’t think it is cowardly, through it can be obnoxious. I am all for pseudonyms, which allow people to get to know a writer, where he stands, and have a more concrete target to disagree with. Plus it helps those with sensitive day jobs be part of the discussion
Comment by tet on 21 July 2008 at 10:10 am:
I’m in favor or pseudonyms and opposed to complete anon-posting, mainly because it’s impossible to figure out who you’re talking to.
I think, as a matter of fact, that we should moderate and end anon-posting when we get the new magazine format going.
Tom
Comment by Joshua on 21 July 2008 at 12:16 pm:
TC – if you want to, go ahead an email buck w/ that suggestion.
I hope you post some pictures and stories from your Alaska trip
Comment by Segen on 21 July 2008 at 3:24 pm:
From the: Trafficking Victims Protection Act Reauthorization Act of 2005
“According to a report issued
by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania in 2001, as
many as 300,000 children in the United States are at risk
for commercial sexual exploitation, including trafficking, at any
given time.”
“Runaway and homeless children in the United States
are highly susceptible to being domestically trafficked for
commercial sexual exploitation.”
These aren’t women, folks. We’re talking about kiddo prostitutes.
Comment by Segen on 21 July 2008 at 3:33 pm:
Sorry Katie. I posted the last comment to the wrong story.
Segen
Comment by Katie on 21 July 2008 at 4:35 pm:
No problem, Segen.
I agree with the pseudonym suggestion. I don’t mind if names are invented, as long as there is a consistent identity we can become familiar with. It makes comments more understandable when they are put in some sort of context.
Comment by Segen on 21 July 2008 at 4:47 pm:
I like the idea of a pen name.
Stalking can be a real problem for some of us. I’d rather not fuel those fires with personal information (including ideas) to the public at large.
I think most of the Urbanagora posters know one another–despite the pen names.
Now the only question is: Who is Kofi?? :-)
Comment by thetodd on 22 July 2008 at 2:51 pm:
I am glad that there are some places where completely anonymous speech is allowed and some where it isn’t (or like here, where it’s allowed but not prevalent).
While the problems with anonymity have already been laid out in detail by several of you, there is one thing I do like about it: many people become much more honest and open when they’re anonymous. I find it useful and interesting to know how people really feel.
It’s also interesting to watch what friends, family, and acquaintances say when they think they’re speaking anonymously, but they’re not. Their writing styles in general or perhaps just little quirks about their language, punctuation, and grammar usage often give them away. Or sometimes their IP addresses do :)
I have learned a few things about human nature by comparing this “anonymous” behavior to the filtered speech that you get from the same people when they’re not “anonymous”, and I’m not sure I’d have ever learned those things if it weren’t for the internet.
Comment by Grumblebear on 22 July 2008 at 10:26 pm:
There was a similar discussion when we started newsgroups on Prairienet back in the Dark Ages. I don’t think we ever reached a decision because the U was hosting the server and their policies prevailed. I did serve as the moderator of a newsgroup for about 6 weeks while the actual owner was taking maternity leave, and it was one of the most unpleasant things I’ve ever tackled; like walking through the sewers in your stocking feet.
The only rules were some kind of relevance to the topic, keep it PG, and no personal attacks. You can imagine the kind of feedback the posts I rejected for personal attacks generated. I was grateful for the anonymous “Moderator” account.
I favor email-verified registration with an iron-clad privacy policy that real identities won’t be revealed without a court order. It tends to weed out trolls and “silly” posts, which haven’t been a problem here yet. As readership picks up, they’ll be coming.
- Stuart