In this report so far, I’ve tried to remain as neutral as possible in my presentation of arguments. However, I do have my own opinion as far as the subject of anonymity goes. To put it bluntly, I am in favor of protecting online anonymity. Very much so, in fact.
You may have noticed that the section of this site for positive arguments is a bit more substantial than for negative arguments, at least as far as evidence goes. This is because the positive arguments are, quite frankly, more substantial. I searched many arguments on both sides of the issue, and I found that those for the positives often presented more historical cases and laboratory data, while the negatives often seemed to be conjecture and hearsay. I suppose the reason for this is because those who were in favor of anonymity had the burden of proof, and thus
needed to present more evidence. No matter what the reasons, they definitely had more bulk to them.
When examining the different practices of worldwide governments, I found it quite interesting that it is the Chinese government which is most prominent in its efforts to require people to register in order to access the Internet. The Chinese government has been quite controversial in some of its other policies, such as the limiting of information that can be searched through
Google.cn (it's quite popular to do an image search for "Tiananmen Square" on that site). I feel that making it illegal to anonymously surf the Internet is just another violation of online rights. Why then should the American government follow this example? The line has to be drawn at some point, and if people were forced to register to use the Internet, it may not be unheard of for the government to go back on their claim that the Internet is the frontier of free information.
I also agree with Bargh’s arguments in favor of anonymity’s psychological and sociological benefits. I have found repeatedly that it’s easier to find people online who make good friends. I have friends that I’ve known online for years that I’ve never once met in person. Additionally, the ability to role play is a safe and healthy outlet for creativity and a release for the stress that can build up in a busy life.
But what about the problems that are present with anonymity? What about the people who use it as a means of flaming others? Well, going along with the spirit of the founding of the country, I’d like to quote Thomas Jefferson: “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” The Internet is an interesting creature; evolutionary, almost. As time goes on, it becomes more and more refined, more and more sophisticated. In fact, I would go so far to say that it is self-regulating. More and more message boards are taking moderation of comments more seriously. The people doing these are acting in an almost utilitarian mindset: do a little extra work so that everyone benefits. They are being vigilant so everyone else can act freely. If only the offline world acted more like this.
And as far as the online crime goes, it is an unfortunate situation which must be dealt with, but not through strict regulation. Vigilance, again, is the key. People must learn how to browse the Internet safely and carefully, and they must pass these lessons on to their children. I think online crime would decrease if people simply made themselves more aware of the possibilities out there. But to forbid anonymity would be an irrevocable mistake. To quote Benjamin Franklin (yet another Founding Father), “they who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.”
And that’s my opinion.
