The False Courage of Anonymity
“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain,” said the Wizard to Dorothy and her marooned band of misfits. Courage is easy, and anonymity is security in the blog world. Oh, how computers can make lions out of cowards.
Friday, I read a blog on FITS in which the author(s) of the site answered specific questions as to their inclination on the issue of Homosexual Marriage. (From what I gathered, FITS opposes the practice in principle, but does not believe government should have a say over the matter.) In several of the comments given in response to the statement, posters preferred to keep their identities hidden.
It is undoubtedly the security of being undiscovered that afforded the commentators such bravado. Cowering behind the curtain that separates revealed and hidden, posters are free to show their true colors employing a vast array of slurs to describe homosexuals and each other. From the comfort of keyboards, bloggers can litter webpages with verbiage reminiscent of writings found on the stalls of bathrooms throughout America’s high schools.
Other than being a nuisance, the overuse of anonymous posting shortchanges all of us for a couple of reasons; it allows posters to make claims without having to do their homework and there is no accountability for the things said or the opinions created.
These two facts mean that the nature of the claims made by Anonymous or other clever but unrevealing monikers isn’t all that it could be.
In this particular case, rather than hosting a discussion of the issue at hand, the conversation quickly turned to little more than middle school lockerroom name-calling. Personal attacks replaced sound judgment. And if bloggers are, as some claim, the most informed and least apathetic members of the population, then why would they choose to turn a perfectly good discussion on an important social issue into a series of hostile bombardments on one another?
The alternative to such bickering and cowardice is, however, quite promising.
If someone is willing to put his or her name on a post, then you can bet one of two things; he has done his research and gathered the facts or the individual in question is truly brave and opening himself to justified criticism. No longer will bloggers just espouse rhetoric that they have heard and taken as gospel.
If posters are encouraged to reveal their identities, then we could consequently see more thorough and more thought provoking posts, rather than the rumor mill gossip that serves no public interest.
Consequently, as a trade off, we would also expect to see fewer posts. But I, for one, would see that trade off as an acceptable casualty realizing that quality in these instances would far outweigh the benefits of quantity.
What it really boils down to is this: if you have something worth saying then you shouldn’t only be comfortable putting your money where your mouth is, but you should be confident and firm in your convictions and proud of your statement.
10 Comments:
the over-the-top comments were written by FITS himself. about a third of the anonymous comments on that site are.
note how the first 'real' commenter falls for it hook line and sinker and springs to FITS defense. funny as heck.
Hear, hear, B.J.
I usually try to avoid responding to anonymous comments on my site, simply because they don't hold any credibility without a willingness to tell us who they are.
As usual, good stuff.
B.J. -
You're right that name-calling isn't as good as reasoned argument.
But there are all sorts of reasons for remaining anonymous. One reason is that if you have an opinion that is different from the majority, you could be fired or otherwise sanctioned by your employer.
Anonymous commentary on politics has a long history. The Federalist Papers were published by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay not under their own names, but as "Publius." Thomas Paine is often credited for helping inspire the American Revolution with his anonymously published Common Sense.
Surely you're not accusing our founding fathers of cowardice, are you?
I use my moniker for my blog and my name when writing letters to the editors of various news papers. Trust me when I say that the mail and phone calls I have received after publication ran from "good job" to "f#ck you and everyone like you, I hope you die, you are an abomination." The last caller I had the police contact.
I agree about the balless "anonymous" ranters need to put their name to their comments or shut up.
BJ,
It seems to me blogs are a way for some folks to release steam or hosility they may be harboring. I seldom read blogs and for the most part put them in the same context as the Sunday funnies...meaningless, juvenile, and at times entertaining at best. If someone has something to say, by goodness put down the can of warm beer, come out of your dark apartment and say it in the real world to real people. What we now read in the blog world is what kids used to talk about at recess in the elementary school yard. Anonymity is for the bully on the playground who suffers from low self-esteem and an inferiority complex.
Mr. Smith,
I am certainly not implying that our founding fathers were cowards. But, I would quickly point out that the ideas forwarded in the Federalist Papers and the other documents you named were of great philosophical value and not the petty name calling we too often see in blogs. My comments were aimed specifically at the blogosphere and shouldn't be applied to any greater context.
Thanks!
very nice...except I think I just learned I was the first "real" commenter on the FITS blog entry you were referring to that anon said fail hook line and sinker...I am such a sucker. I just don't know FITS like you folks do. I'm learning fast though. :-) t
Don't feel too bad Tammy. I must have read the Edward R. Murrow thing and its first over-the-top comment right after you did, and I almost fell for it, too. I was composing a sentence along the lines of, "You're playing right into his hands! This is exactly what he wants . . ." and then it hit me. I probably said, "DOH!" loud enough for the neighbors to hear it.
Full story, The Golf Channel. accommodation Golf Association guidelines that limit the size of a driver to a 5-by-5-inch square. This season on the PGA Tour, TaylorMade's staff players have used a mixture of the two drivers. Nelson won 11 tournaments in a row in 1945, every tournament he entered for that period.
I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you! Web designer community Long mpg movies xxx free directory cosmetics Iowa lasik surgery Smoke and fire alarm price Radar detector on clearance oxycontin recipes sign cadet plotter
Post a Comment
<< Home