The New York Times published a review this week of a new book by Jaron Lanier entitled You Are Not a Gadget. Among the themes mentioned in the book and the review was anonymity and how it's fostered a culture of meanness.
I've yet to read this book. Though in review alone it sounds far more sensible than the rest of the Web-fondling frippery currently lining the shelves. On my own office bookshelf sits a copy of Inside Larry and Sergey's Brain, which I've been putting off reading for mental-health reasons (i.e., preserving my own brain).
Anyway, back to anonymity.
We've talked quite a bit about this subject here on Internet Evolution. While some argue that anonymity is necessary for liberty and one's own ability to speak freely, both Larry Roberts and Vint Cerf have expressed that, if they were to do it all over again, they would at least build stronger authentication into the Internet's architecture. Esther Dyson, chairman of EDventure Holdings, too, expressed her concerns that anonymity encourages bad behavior.
Too many events suggest that last point goes without saying. The first that always comes to my mind is Megan Meier's suicide after being taunted by a friend's mother disguising herself as a love interest on MySpace. There's also no shortage of vehement comments on message boards throughout the Web, always donning the username "anonymous" or some other pseudonym. It's just a fact: Ridding oneself of an identity makes it easier to offend. Dyson herself put it a little differently a few years ago: "People behave differently [i.e., better] when they know they're being watched."
According to the Times reviewer, Lanier laments that "decisions made in the formative years of computer networking" promoted anonymity, which enabled "the dark side of human nature." In turn, Lanier says, a "culture of sadism" has gone mainstream.
I agree with Lanier, but there's reason to believe this anonymity issue is going to be moot going forward, thanks in large part to companies like Facebook (Nasdaq: FB).
In fact, the trend for the new digital age is to not only not be anonymous, but to give up more information about oneself than today's data hunters and gatherers probably ever dreamed of. Rather than hiding behind the cloaks of yesteryear, Web users are willingly outing themselves much to the benefit of companies like Facebook and Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) that profit from users' narcissistic impulses.
In an earlier video blog series, IE founder Steve Saunders describes this as the rise of "digital profiling" and argues that Internet users are causing anonymity's demise by surrendering so much personal information. This century, he argues, will be defined by identity rather than anonymity.
But will the rise of identity remedy this "dark side of the Web" problem? In a Times blog, one author tackles this question and makes the argument that anonymity is certainly a factor in this "culture of nastiness," but it isn't the only one:
There's the immediacy factor - it's so easy to leave a comment on a blog post without taking a deep breath and collecting your thoughts.
And there's also a much bigger force at work: People don't realize there is a human being on the other side of online commentary. There is a digital blurring of humanity that takes place on the Web.
Earlier this week I wrote about the rise of virtual communications and how it's hindering our ability to communicate. Taking into consideration the aforementioned author's points, we may also be trending toward a colder culture. Anonymity may not be a problem in the future, as we trade our cloaks in for detailed autobiographies. But that doesn't mean we will have arrested the dehumanizing effects of all the technology underlying this so-called "social" media.
Its just a whole new World. I don't think we will go back, we must adjust to having an online identity, and learn how to make it work in our advantage. To be completely anonymous is too complicated.
Nicole, I am 100% sure that is just a matter of time.The web behavior has already federally regulated, I am sure in 20-50 years, there will be the whole codex of laws that regulate web behavior:)
Re: "Articles of tragic deaths--accidents or crime victims--ultimately result in some sort of anonymous "That person deserved it," kind of comment. Amazing."
Brian, that's really disturbing. Nothing I don't see regularly on forums throughout the Web, but it's always disappointing to see. Are people just completely heartless or is the Internet some kind of outlet for them to vent their general misery and frustrations? Maybe a bit of both. Regardless, that's terrible.
For the most part, the most insane and evil comments I see on a regular basis are on YouTube videos. People who leave comments there have the ability to completely veer off topic and into some sort of land of meanness and lunacy. It's really bizarre.
Lawrence, what you describe sounds ideal to me -- though perhaps not for people who live in China or Iran, as cbrown points out. But isn't the real problem here that true authentication is really difficult to achieve? I'm supposing that's why Roberts and Cerf lament not building better authentication into the architecture in the beginning.
Interesting thought, mashka. I'd be curious to see how this would be taught in schools. But your point about teaching Web behavior in schools also makes me wonder if we're coming upon a future where Web behavior is federally regulated.
Re: "I tend to agree with the sentiment that anonymity doesn't create the meanness, it just gives the meanness an avenue. I tend to believe people were just as mean before Internet anonymity."
I agree that people were mean way before Internet anonymity came along -- but the ability to hide behind a pseudonym or be completely anonymous makes it a whole lot easier, if not tempting, to unleash that cruel side. So does anonymity breed meanness? Not exactly -- your point about it being an avenue is more apt. But I wouldn't totally discount the possibility that the ability to be anonymous entices some people to get those mean thoughts out.
I think anonymity -- coupled with the relatively distancing aspect of the Web itself -- provides a nice cover or excuse for being nasty. I quite agree with teh Dyson quote in Nicole's post that people behave differently when they know they're being watched (ask any bank teller).
And if less site traffic also means fewer flame wars over the snark that's the mainstay of Gawker and the like, that's fine by me. These "drive-by's" may have been entertaining and fun, but have outlived their usefulness and in fact led to some real tragedy.
I take it you don't use facebook? and if so, I sure hope you're not one of the alias/anonymous users..although if you were, I highly doubt you'd be one of the leeching "social media marketer" lurkers. I believe (because you have control..although Zuckerberg says the trend is otherwise in privacy) you should "show yourself" on facebook if you use it.
If your anonymous blog thrives good for you. If your info was all tha valuable, anonymous or not, it can be got...and revealed. so why bother? The only solid anonymous twitter that I know of is Common_squirrel and he/she only says about 5 things.
It is true that online anonymity could encourage bad behavior and promotes meanness. However, I think it is better to be anonymous online for many good reasons. Although you keep your personal information "private" and secure, Hackers will strive to get it anyway. Why then expose yourself and help them steal your valuable information?
Beside, most people who have to know your real identity are not online, you can meet them in real life and prove it if you have to.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
We never thought we'd write about carrier pigeons. Or the Pillsbury Dough Boy. Or corned beef hash. But these are some of the many ingredients you'll find in this week's mashup of top technology -- yes, really -- stories from around the world. Grab a fork and dig in.
Anyone still convinced that Amazon is essentially an online bookstore should at long last revise their opinions. Amazon may be gearing up to bring its full range of products and services right to your front door.
Google and Apple don't have a lock on wearable technologies. Neither do the Pebble watch or Sony. Plenty of other developers -- from well-established corporations to startups -- want a foothold in a space expected to be worth $6 billion by 2016, according to IMS Research. (See: Mary Meeker: The Future Will Be Wearable.)
IBM is advancing both its Mobile First and open-source strategies through a partnership with 10Gen, the company behind open-source NoSQL database MongoDB. Under the agreement, unveiled last week, both companies will work together on a new standard for mobile enterprise applications.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
Steve Saunders talks about the risks inherent in uncontrolled, widespread profiling of Internet users, and how one day this practice could form the basis of a new industry, the Outernet, which in economic terms will have outgrown the commercial value of the Internet itself.
Search companies and social networks are collecting incredibly detailed information about their users, says Steve Saunders, who predicts that these 'profiles' could one day become commodities to be bought and sold by companies on 'profile markets' or 'identity exchanges’ – the digital DNA equivalents of the financial and commodities exchanges on which stocks, oil, and gold are traded.
One of the most important Internet issues of all time is being ignored by the media. In this three-part video series Steve Saunders explains how search companies are turning the tables on their users by creating user profiles for financial gain, and how soon this trend will explode into full scale profiling.
More companies are trolling social networks to find and vet potential job candidates. Beware the pitfalls of blurring the line between personal and professional lives.
The quest for Webpage clicks and ad impressions is creating a market for sensational truths and lies in equal measure. How are we going to get to the bottom of any real issue online – like what's really going on with Carrier IQ, for example – if we can't separate hype from reality?
Big-data and analytics tools enable marketers to understand customers as individuals, identifying unmet needs and addressing each customer as a "segment of one," says John Kennedy, VP corporate marketing, IBM.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The IBM Smarter Commerce Global Summit in Monaco kicked into high gear today, and we've already begun to see news emerging from that lovely city-state by the sea.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Email This
