Maas, D. (2013, October 29). Online Anonymity is Not Only for Trolls and Political Dissidents. Electronic Frontier Foundation. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/online-anonymity-not-only-trolls-and-political-dissidents

Citation

Annotation

In his article, Maas analyzes the weekly podcast, Slate, and the concept of online anonymity. The author brings our attention to the common view many people have regarding virtual anonymity - that is it mostly used by "the ugliest forms of discourse". He provides examples of haters on Twitter and YouTube as well as people who fear violence. Nonetheless, Maas is determined to challenge this idea of "people having to own up to what they are saying online" and thus, he comes up with a list of all who would miss out if online anonymity seized to exist. Such list includes: "the young LGBTQ youth seeking advice online about coming out to their parents, the marijuana grower who needs to ask questions on an online message board about lamps and fertilizer or complying with state law, without publicly admitting to committing a federal offense, the medical patient seeking advice from other patients in coping with a chronic disease, whether it's alopecia, irritable bowel syndrome, cancer or a sexually transmitted infection, the online dater, who wants to meet new people but only reveal her identities after she's determined that potential dates are not creeps, the business that wants no-pulled-punches feedback from its customers, the World of Warcraft player, or any other MMOG gamer, who only wants to engage with other players in character, artists - anonymity is integral to the work of The Yes Men, Banksy and Keizer, the low-income neighborhood resident who wants to comment on an article about gang violence in her community, without incurring retribution in the form of spray paint and broken windows, the boyfriend who doesn’t want his girlfriend to know he’s posing questions on a forum about how to pick out a wedding ring and propose. On the other end: anonymity is important to anyone seeking advice about divorce attorneys online. the youth from an orthodox religion who secretly posts reviews on hip hop albums or R-rated movies, the young, pregnant woman who is seeking out advice on reproductive health services, the person seeking mental health support from an online community. There's a reason that support groups so often end their names with "Anonymous", the job seeker, in pursuit of cover letter and resume advice in a business blogger's comments, who doesn't want his current employer to know he is looking for work, many people's sexual lives, whether they're discussing online erotica or arranging kink meet-ups."

With the growing amount of online communities, Maas argues that virtual anonymity provides comfort and benefits numerous persons who seek advice and help and who are unable to ask for it in real life, for various reasons. I can understand his point of view, however the author does not mention the potential danger that comes with online anonymity. What about pedophilia? Isn't internet and pseudonymity a main source of their victims? I think his article would be stronger if he did add and include the notion of legal consequence as a reason against online anonymity. He could have provided an example of occurrences of pedophilia related acts and link it together with the haters on Twitter and YouTube as well as those who fear violence. Overall, I think presenting all possibilities is always the most effective for the reader, since it gives the reader a fair opportunity to agree or disagree with the authors' argumentation.

Page Author: Aleks Migorska