So the idea of creating and maintaining online identities as well as the term "networked self" means a whole lot of different things. As we have all experienced our online identity is closely linked to our social life, employment and even education but these identities are pretty malleable. While we can represent a “real” or public version of ourselves we can also create identities, join communities and interact with others using and identity that might not be the same as they way you identify offline. I think one of the most important and interesting aspects of online identity is being able to build a secondary representation of yourself and I think the debate on whether or not people should be able to act anonymously online or need to use their real names in order to use internet services is incredibly important to the way that we interact with web 2.0.
I found the Danah Boyd blog assigned resonating when we think about representing yourself with alternate names. She mentioned ways that people use pseudonymity to protect their public selves. What I took from these cases is that these secondary personas allow us to explore our identities, especially aspects that might not go over so well in public, aspects relating to politics, sexuality, and other more taboo subjects as well as being able to protect ourselves in a way that isn’t possible offline.
While I think that Boyds article really does the best job expressing why it is important that people aren't required to use their real names online this article expands on examples of people using pseudonyms or writing anonymously.
Theres another side to this of course that deals with the dangers of accountability in anonymity. It seems that while there are benefits to participate with online identity attached to a real person, its hard to make sure these people are accountable.
I understand why facebook and google might want you to use your real name (some of their thoughts on the matter can be fleshed out here, because they want to be able to hold someone accountable for their actions. But should this mean that we have to use our real names online? I don't think so. Our first amendment rights protect our ability to speak freely and anonymously and in addition to that I think the idea that anonymity can protect a lot of people who really need a safe space far outweighs the dangers of anonymity online.
“Not everyone is safer by giving out their real name. Quite the opposite; many people are far LESS safe when they are identifiable. And those who are least safe are often those who are most vulnerable.”
So I wonder what you guys think? I know there are dangers of people writing anonymously online, and there might be more examples of those dangers, but to me Boyds ideas about real name requirements actually hurting people who are marginalized outweighs the dangers, do you agree?
I also agree that requiring people to post online using their real life identities would be detrimental to the free exchange of information and the online conversation. One of the most important aspects of online anonymity is that it allows people in situations to tell their stories without fear of real world reprisals. If individuals were not allowed to use a pseudonym we would not have the freedom of information that we currently do.
ReplyDeleteThis is of course a double edged sword. As I often say in regards to all technologies and tools, they are inherently neutral. As such, their use can be exploited in various ways. Those who wish to hide behind the guise of anonymity in order to hurt others will also utilize it in that fashion. What it comes down to is whether the pros of having it outweigh the cons. In this case I believe they do.