Internet anonymity is as destructive as Internet porn

[R.A. Hettinga]

This should be good for a laugh around here...

Cheers,
RAH
...and here I thought that anonymity was a fundamental human right. And I
like to listen to Praeger, even, on occasion.
-------

<http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1007/prager102307.php3?printer_friendly>


Jewish World Review Oct. 23, 2007 / 11 Mar-Cheshvan 5768

Internet anonymity is as destructive as Internet porn

By Dennis Prager




http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Whenever people lament aspects of the
Internet, they are most likely to lament the net's ubiquity of pornography.
Only Heaven knows, for example, how many kids, searching for some
government information, typed in "whitehouse.com" only to be greeted by
pornographic images (happily, the website changed hands in 2004). It is
almost impossible to completely avoid such imagery even with filtering
programs.

But there is something at least as awful - and arguably more destructive -
that permeates the Internet: the lies, vitriol, obscenities and ad hominem
attacks made by anonymous individuals on almost every website that deals
with public issues.

Sexual images and prose for the purpose of sexual titillation are not new.
But the ability of anyone in society to debase public discourse is new.
Until the Internet, in the public's best known venue for self-expression -
letters to the editor published in newspapers and magazines - people either
expressed themselves in a civilized manner or they were not published. And
overwhelmingly, even those letters that were not published were written in
a respectful manner because the letter-writers had to reveal their real
names and their addresses (though only names and cities were published).

Being identifiable breeds responsibility; anonymity breeds irresponsibility.

That is why people - even generally decent people - tend to act so much
less morally when in a crowd (the crowd renders them anonymous). That is
why people tend to act more decently when they walk around with their names
printed on a nametag. That is why people act more rudely when in their cars
- they cannot be identified as they could outside of their car. There is no
question but that most people would write very different entries on the
Internet if their names were printed alongside their submission.

E-mail provides another example. It is the very rare individual who sends a
hate-filled, obscenity-laced e-mail that includes his name. As the
recipient of such e-mails, I know firsthand how rarely people identify
themselves when sending hate-filled mail. It is so rare, in fact, that I
usually respond to hate mail that includes the writer's name just to
commend him for attaching his name to something so embarrassing.

The Internet practice of giving everyone the ability to express himself
anonymously for millions to read has debased public discourse. Cursing, ad
hominem attacks and/or the utter absence of logic characterize a large
percentage of many websites' "comments" sections. And because people tend
to do what society says it is OK to do, many people, especially younger
people, are coming to view such primitive forms of self-expression as
acceptable.

Some might argue that anonymity enables people to more freely express their
thoughts. But this is not true. Anonymity only enables people to more
freely express their feelings. Anonymity values feelings over thought, and
immediate expression over thoughtful reflection.

There is not one good reason for any website, left or right, or
non-political, to allow people to avoid identifying themselves. Anyone
interested in serious political discourse, or in merely lowering the hate
levels in our country, should welcome the banning of anonymous postings.

It would be interesting to find out how many websites continue to encourage
anonymous postings. Presumably, they would pay some financial price by
insisting on posters identifying themselves. I don't know why, and I don't
know how big a price that would be, but it is hard to imagine that it is
higher than the price society pays when hate, anger and irrationality
become the normal way of citizens expressing themselves. And even from the
websites' own perspectives this policy is probably self-defeating. I doubt
I am alone in reading fewer and fewer comments sections because of the low
level of so many of the postings. Just as bad money chases away good money,
moronic postings chase away intelligent ones. I have come to the point
where I even read fewer comments posted about my own columns.

Websites should insist on listing names and cities of those who post
comments, just as newspapers and magazines do.

The irresponsible, the angry, the obscene and the dumb have virtually taken
over many Internet dialogues. But there is an easy fix, and websites owe it
to society to use it. Just ban anonymous postings.

-- 
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'