For every vocal proponent of anonymity on the Internet, there is an equally vocal critic. In this section, we shall examine some of the arguments that these critics use. The first argument is perhaps one we’ve all dealt with at some point: the loss of decency and accountability when a malicious user is online. The second is the fear of a pseudonymous person online losing touch with reality. The third argument deals with the use of anonymity as a tool to assist with carrying out illegal actions, from scams to terrorism. This shall be expanded and focused in the fourth argument, which shall deal with crimes involving children and child predators, which is a topic that worries many parents.
You may notice that many of these arguments seem to be closely related to the arguments in favor of anonymity. This is because in many of the reports I read, the arguments were presented together, almost as though to show the dichotomy between the good and bad that is present.
No Accountability, No Decency
Penny Arcade, one of the Internet’s most popular web comics, has a particular strip in which they demonstrate their "theory" on the deleterious effects of online anonymity. The strip can be found
here (
NOTE: The strip contains profanity and may be considered offensive).
This view is held by many. Although the Internet has an unwritten code of conduct (or “Netiquette”), there is a very real fear of abusive language being used against fellow users. This practice is known online as “flaming.” This practice also includes hateful speech and personal threats. Critics are quick to point out that this is much more hurtful and dangerous online, because people more readily believe (or at least internalize) the printed word, rather than if it were vocalized. It is also more than likely that while flaming others, people will insert profanity and other offensive materials which could easily be seen by children.
If unchecked, these singular instances of flaming can escalate in to full-on “flame wars”, in which multiple users can engage in such hateful speech. In a snowball-like effect, more and more people will be swept up in the war, and people who would normally speak intelligently would instead begin to throw insults. This often brings down the integrity of an entire message board.
There are some who actually do not mind so much that people express their opinions, even if they are highly negative. These critics do object, however, to the use of anonymity as a shield. They point out that one of the keys to trust in our society is
accountability.
One counter to the “anonymity-founded-the-country” argument used in the previous section that has been given is the fact that the Declaration of Independence, which is considered one of the most important documents in American history, was
not anonymous. The founding fathers signed their names with the knowledge that they would be ostracized and perhaps punished severely. Doing so gave them more accountability and more of a moral high-ground than someone would have if they were simply anonymous. Had the Declaration been signed by “A Few Angry Patriots,” the document might have been ignored and the American Revolution may never have taken off. Similarly, the cases of people using anonymity as a protection from retribution are questioned by critics such as David Davenport, who says that “cowering behind a cloak of anonymity hardly seems an auspicious basis for profound social upheavals.”
(
Source 1,
Source 2,
Source 3)
Losing Touch with Reality
One counterpoint to Bragh’s “true self” argument is that the ability to role play as other people online provides the unfortunate opportunity to get lost in a fantasy. As farfetched as this may sound, it is actually not so unheard of. The power of the mind has been shown to be very strong; there have actually been cases of people who have convinced themselves that they could fly becoming injured when they attempted to prove themselves right. Having such delusional and unrealistic behavior based on online personalities is a real fear for some.
It is said that part of the finding of the true self is seeking validation of your identity. However, this is usually in reference to people who are still grounded in reality. For those who already have a tenuous grasp on reality, this validation could be potentially harmful, and perhaps even dangerous. For example, consider “role-playing romances.” Normally, these are online “romantic” relationships between two characters or personas online which does not extend into the offline lives of the users. However, there have been cases of people who considered these relationships to be fully legitimate, even while the other party member does not believe they are. Critics say that there is the possibility that one of these individuals may become obsessed with their online companion, and begin harassing or even stalking them in the offline world (
NOTE: There is no record of this happening in any report I have found).
There is also the possibility for the loss of a coherent self. If a person is exploring multiple aspects of their personality online, these distinctions may possibly become so pronounced that they eventually invade the psyche of the user, resulting in split or multiple personalities. There is very little research on this topic, and so it can currently be neither proved nor disproved.
(
Source)
Stemming Illegal Activities
After the events of September 11, 2001, an investigation revealed that e-mail was the primary method of communication between the conspirators responsible for the attack. These terrorists used sophisticated encryption technology, which made it difficult for investigators to decode messages and gather information. And anthroponyms were never used in any of these transactions. Simply put, the worst act of terrorism in the United States was planned using online anonymity.
In addition to overt acts of terrorism, many other illegal activities are made possible (or at the very least, easier), thanks to online anonymity. Hacking into sensitive servers (such as those with private information like Social Security numbers and the like), financial scams, collusion between corporations, blackmail, and activities which threaten children (detailed further below) are all assisted by anonymity and encryption.
Consider the following situation: the FBI encounters a suspicious message online which threatens the security of a major Washington, D.C. landmark (assume the message isn’t encrypted). After sending an alert to the area to provide extra protection, they need to find the source of the message. They try the easy way first: see if there is a name attached to the message. There isn’t. Well, then, check to see the IP address. There is one, but it’s to anonymizing server. After pressing the anonymizer, the FBI gets the IP address which the message was sent to. However, this leads to yet another anonymizing server. At this point, there is almost no way to know how deep the anonymity goes, and so a potentially dangerous criminal cannot easily be traced, and will likely not be caught. And if the original message
was encrypted, there is a good chance the FBI wouldn’t have been able to find it to begin with.
These critics do not claim that removing online anonymity would eliminate these types of crimes. However, they do say that allowing anonymity online is like pouring gasoline on a bonfire - it can only make things worse. While online registration will not stop crime, it will make criminals easier to track online, and will stem off the problems that we now face.
(
Source 1,
Source 2,
Source 3)
Safety of the Innocent
Another concern that has been expressed about using pseudonyms on the Internet, in particular on social programs such as
AIM (an instant messaging program) is that people, especially children, can be maliciously deceived by misleading usernames. Consider the following username:
surferguy15
This name could be interpreted in many different ways, some of which include:
-A 15-year-old male who enjoys surfing.
-The 15th person to use the name “surferguy”.
-A person of indiscriminate age who enjoys surfing and the number 15 (perhaps it was their number on a sports team).
But the interpretation which frightens many people, most especially parents, is that the owner of this user name may be a child predator of any age who cares nothing about surfing, but uses it to make him seem more attractive to females, and uses the number 15 to give the impression that he may be 15-years-old, in order to attract underage users.
Because the younger generation is growing up on computers and the Internet, and because younger users are less able to discern possibly dangerous situations, this is considered a serious concern. Some advocacy groups have claimed that registration would help the situation in two different ways. First, if a user was a registered sex offender, they could be prevented from using programs like AIM as well as social networking sites like
MySpace and
Facebook. Secondly, if there is any suspicious activity reported on such programs, information on the users could be easily reported to the authorities, which is not possible with the current, fairly anonymous system.
(
Source)
In our next section, we shall see some of the ways that governments have dealt with online anonymity…
