Deborah Johnson, in her paper Ethics Online: Shaping social behaviour online takes more than new laws and modified edicts, points out how most social networks and online communication platforms make use of generic user Ids; the result of this is that the individual must make a concerted effort to establish their real identity- online communication seems to favour anonymity. The creation of different personas on discussion boards, blogs, email accounts, and social networks has both benefits and dangers, with the ethical question asking where we draw the line between protecting anonymity, and deceiving others.
Smart Secrets Online watchdog, onlineethics.org labels ‘anonymity’ as any time that you communicate or transact on the web without revealing your real name or alternatively obscuring vital information like your age, gender or where you live. Withholding personal details, or operating under anonymity, is smart way to avoid identity thieves and fraudsters, and also safeguards your financial data when making transactions online. Anonymity can also encourage freedom of expression and thought; it can encourage people to discuss topics they are not normally comfortable with in face-to-face conversations, such as socially stigmatized problems. Anonymity can serve as an equaliser, facilitating participation and discussion in activities where factors such as race, gender, physical appearance, class, etc may discourage fair treatment.
sNeAkiEpedo@
But not all online users are genuine, friendly people looking for stimulating conversation and debate. Anonymity allows people to snoop, steal, sabotage, harass and libel other people; freedom of expression can be taken to an extreme where people behave in harmful, unethical, or even illegal ways. Anonymity can create problems of integrity and trust; it disconnects the words from the person, and encourages people to behave in ways they feel they can’t in face-to-face interactions. Johnson highlights this problem of diminished trust using an incident where an online women’s group discovered that a participant whom they believed to be an older single women confined to a wheel chair was really a male psychiatrist in his 30s; despite knowing that personas are created daily, we still feel cheated when we discover that we have been deceived, and our trust diminishes.
Greater Good?
On the other hand, a very similar example of anonymity in chat groups had entirely different results. Perverted-Justice.com is an organisation where members create personas of young children and teenagers on online chat rooms, hoping to catch out adults impersonating children, and potential paedophiles. To date, they have had 510 convictions. Deliberate deception is used to crackdown on criminals; but this kind of deception and anonymity in general is not always welcome. Chinadaily.com posted an article yesterday stating that China aims to put an end to anonymous comments online, in an attempt to strengthen monitoring of “harmful information” on the Internet, and intensify its crackdown on various online crimes.
An Online Conscience
Online laws and technology will never really be able to address problems of behaviour online- even ending anonymous commentary will not put an end to discriminatory, harmful, or inaccurate information and discussion. Johnson suggests that we need to internalise norms of behaviour for online interaction, while wisegeek.comsuggests adopting a code of online ethics where we strive to act the same way online as is personally acceptable in other areas of life. But without gate-keeping, will these methods ever prove to be successful?
No comments:
Post a Comment