Many who praise the virtues of anonymity on the Internet are often those who do so of anonymity in general. They cite historical sources as well as experimental results in their claims. In this section, I will briefly explain three major arguments in favor of anonymity. The first is that anonymity is a constitutionally-protected right and that it is “a shield from the tyranny of the majority.” The second is that it allows people to experiment with different aspects of their personality in order to help search for their “true self”. Finally, the third reason discussed is that Internet anonymity leads to more honest online communication, as well as an increase in the liking of those you meet.
It is interesting to note that all these reasons have the commonality of relating to social interaction, be it with individuals, societies, or one’s self. Ironically, this goes against the claims of many that the Internet makes people less social creatures.
Protection of the Unpopular Opinion
Many of the proponents of anonymity on the Internet, and in general, have expressed how important it is to the protection of people’s rights. What’s more, anonymity had an integral role in the founding of the United States of America. For example, Thomas Paine, whose influential pamphlet
Common Sense, which many considered to be a large factor in the growth of American Revolutiony sentiment, was originally published with the author’s credit being “An Englishman.” In fact, despite the immense popularity of the pamphlet, Paine died in relative obscurity, while an anonymous “Englishman” was long considered to be a threat by the British Parliament. Had they known who the author was, it is very possible he may have been arrested and perhaps executed for treason.
In fact, anonymity has often been used as a means of expressing views which may be unpopular, especially those which promote views contrary to the government’s. This has especially been the case in totalitarian states; in Nazi-Germany and the Soviet Union, for example, there was much underground literature written in opposition to the government, also published under false names. Had the authors used their anthroponyms, they would almost assuredly be killed, along with their families and anyone else involved in the literature. In such a state of fear, anonymity can be a necessity.
Going further, anonymity has served to expose corruption and other problems with governments and societies. Consider William Mark Felt Sr., who used the name “Deep Throat” during the Watergate Scandal in the early 1970s. This act helped to clean up the American political system and helped the American public to know that they’re leaders were not purely innocent. Here, anonymity played a powerful role. Similarly, blacklisted writers during the McCarthy era were able to publish their writings, including those exposing the bully tactics of the government at that time, under pseudonyms.
The Internet has helped with these kinds of actions. In modern-day China (which we will be examining a bit more later), human rights workers have used the Internet as an outlet to speak out against the grievances that the government is committing towards its people. The same is happening in many other countries, but is becoming more and more difficult, as registration requirements are becoming more and more strict. Because of this, there may still be many human rights violations which may be going unreported for fear of punishment.
In America, the rights of anonymity and pseudonymity are considered constitutionally protected by the First Amendment, as a part of having truly free speech is the ability to speak under whatever name you want, or no name at all. The Supreme Court itself has also affirmed the constitutionality of anonymity more than once (more information on which will be available in the “Government Response” section of this site).
(
Source 1,
Source 2,
Source 3)
The Search for the True Self
Psychologist John A. Bargh, a social psychology professor at Yale University, is one of the leading proponents of anonymity on the Internet, mainly for psychological and sociological reasons. The first of these reasons, Bargh claims, is the ability to find one’s “true self”; that is, the person that one is on the inside and wants to be seen as on the outside. This is in opposition to the "actual self," the person that one currently is, as defined by the world around them.
One unique element of anonymity is the ability to “role play.” That is, one can act as though they were someone else, be it of a different location, personality, or even gender. Bargh is careful to make the distinction that this shouldn’t be dismissed as simple “pretending” but rather “exploring.” He says that “the idea that people possess multiple senses of self, or personas, is not a new one in psychology or sociology.” He and his colleagues claim that people are often stuck in a sort of rut in the offline world, as they are unable to escape the roles they have been, in a sense, assigned by their families and peers (and others whom they are always in some communication with). Hence, changing one’s persona is often difficult in offline life.
The Internet, on the other hand, is a place in which the true self may be more easily expressed. Because of the anonymous nature, the costs of disclosing negative (or possibly taboo) aspects about oneself are diminished, if not circumvented. One of the most important features of the true self is that we want to feel validated. That is, we want our true self to be accepted as real and significant by others. When we cannot find this kind of validation in the offline world, the Internet may be the best place to do so. In several experiments performed by Bargh and his colleagues, it was shown that the characteristics of one’s true self were more clearly seen over the Internet than in face-to-face communication.
Because finding – or at the very least, searching for – one’s true self is generally considered a healthy and beneficial practice for one’s psyche, the ability to use anonymity to role play with the various aspects of one’s personality is definitely a good thing, particularly for people who are in somewhat marginalized roles in the offline world.
(
Source)
Honest Communication and Better Relationships
Another psychological benefit noted in favor of anonymity is the opportunity for better relationships with those you interact with. At first, this may seem surprising, but we shall soon see why it actually makes sense.
There is a common misconception that the Internet is a key in social isolation and diminished ties with family and friends. The most popular image is a lonely teenager sitting his room, the only illumination in which comes from his computer monitor. This misconception stemmed from a study at Carnegie Mellon University which found that a small but statistically reliable percentage of self-reported feelings of loneliness was linked with increased Internet usage. In truth, this accounted for less than 1% of the depression level in a two-year period. However, because the media enjoys startling sound bytes, all that was said to the general public was “Internet usage leads to increased depression.” And with that, the Internet’s reputation was tarnished, perhaps irrevocably.
However, various studies have been done on the subject, and the results show that people tend to be more honest with each other on the Internet, and that relationships which form on the Internet are often stronger (of course, none of these statistics are absolute; but then, no statistics are).
It has been shown time and time again that a person’s self-reported social desirability decreases online, especially when anonymous. What does this mean? Consider the following: being a bad driver is not considered socially desirable, and is often looked down upon. However, an individual is more likely to answer honestly the question “Are you a bad driver?” honestly on an online survey than they would on an offline one.
This honesty continues into interactions with other people online. Because we have no immediate commitment to these people, we are more likely to be honest with them. This is know as the “Train Passenger Case,” after the common literary scenario in which train passengers divulge secrets to each other, because they will likely never see each other again, and so there is no harm in them knowing. The same is true online. If you tell someone online a secret and it truly disgusts them, you simply need sign off and never worry about them again. However, if they hold what you tell them in a favorable light, this can help to create a relationship, and a strong relationship at that.
There has been shown to be an increase in liking between people who first meet on the Internet, whether it be for romance or simple friendship. The reason for this is both twofold and deceivingly simple. First of all, when two people communicate on the Internet, they do so (most of the time) because they share common interests. Because shared interests are key factors in relationships, it is an important first step. Secondly, when your first meeting with a person is online, you do not see what they look like. Studies show that most relationships that “could have worked” never took off due to looks. Many times, a person will find another less-than-attractive, and will suddenly decide not to have anything to do with that person again. Online, though, a person is attracted to another’s intellectual self, and so the physical aspect doesn’t keep compatible people apart.
Other studies have shown that people whose first meeting is online, and whose second meeting is offline, tend to have a longer-lasting relationship than those who first meet offline. In a world which people are becoming increasingly separated, it should be considered important to find those who we can consider friends, which Internet anonymity can help.
(
Source 1,
Source 2,
Source 3,
Source 4)
Yet with all these positive attributes, it may be easy to forget that Internet anonymity has negative sides as well…
