anonymous blogging, trolls, misogyny and ethics

[rm]

http://ethicist.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/is-it-ok-to-blog-about-this-woman-anonymously/

Chat amongst yourselves. I'm off to save the world (er, so not really, but let's pretend, okay?)

Comments

[heron61.livejournal.com]

So...he proposes that the only viable response to a misogynist and racist culture whose hatred continues to make itself known at every opportunity is to deem free speech a privilege, rather than a right?

Where do you get that? Anonymous speech /= free speech (except in the cases mentioned, where there is a likelihood of retribution). The fact that people are willing to say hurtful and appalling things anonymously that they wouldn't say if their name was attached to the statement has nothing to do with free speech. It has to do with the fact that when many people have the chance to act anonymously, politeness, and in some cases civilization, vanishes from their discourse. I can see many reasons (most of which having to do with protecting them from retribution from their parents and schools) for minors to be able to post anonymously. However, there are far fewer reasons (other than various sorts of whistle-blowing) for adults in any first world nation to do so. I do not see that free speech has anything to do with the right for someone to be an insulting and hurtful jackass and not have their identity attached to their comments. At that point, the only thing stopping them from making the exact same comments is the fact that other people will be able to know that they made them.

[argentla.livejournal.com]

It depends on how you define anonymity, doesn't it?

I stand by my point.

[woogledesigns.livejournal.com]

How do you define anonymity?

[argentla.livejournal.com]

To include, for instance:

- Publishing under a pseudonym
- Participating online using a handle or alias
- Identifying one's self only by first name, or by a nickname.

All of these, by the blogger's logic, could be used in an "abusive" way. However, let's consider, for instance, the implications for women if every post made in an online discussion, every membership in a dating site, every photographic modeling job published online had to be accompanied by her full real name. (And why not her home address, as well, just so that no one will confuse the Jane Smith of Phoenix, Arizona with the Jane Smith of Portland?)

I'm amazed by the argument that there is no "legitimate" reason for anyone to write or post anonymously. It's very much in the same line as the people who advocate requiring people to care identification at all times, because after all, only criminals have anything to hide from the legitimate authorities.

A professor I once had, a Basque who'd grown up in Franco-era Spain, remarked wrly, "Americans like to flirt with fascism because they've never really had to live with it. Believe me, after you've had policemen demand to see your papers a few times, the thrill wears off very quickly."

[(Anonymous)]

I think there is an important distinction to be made between pseudonymity, wherein you do not have to make your personal identity plain to be seen and anonymity wherein your personal identity can never be known or revealed.

The internet already allows prolific pseudonymity but not necessarily any anonymity, as I mentioned below.

[woogledesigns.livejournal.com]

I think there is an important distinction to be made between pseudonymity, wherein you do not have to make your personal identity plain to be seen and anonymity wherein your personal identity can never be known or revealed.

The internet already allows prolific pseudonymity but not necessarily any anonymity, as I mentioned below.

Hahaha lj logged me out so I appeared anonymouse. This amuses me XD