On social media anonymity

Open letter to HoL proprietor about anonymity

Hugh I have been pondering the points you made some months ago about anonymous postings, or rather posts made by members who have chosen to be anonymous. I'd invite you to consider the following suggestion that would allow for your current policy for continuing anonymity – yet might offer benefit all round:

That, before a new member joins, the advantages and disadvantages of anonymity are spelt out and then the member is free to use a real or an assumed name.

Some might have a transitory need to join and or have a genuine need to remain secret. However, it seems to me that some of those who might casually and unthinkingly elect to go incognito, suffer disadvantage that might not occur to them at the time of joining.

First, there is a risk to the anonymous poster that they could be unmasked, which in some circumstances could be embarrassing.

Second, even where such a person manages to keep their identity secret, that member's posts will tend to suffer from a lack of credibility. Not at all in respect of factual things that can be verified independently: but quite a lot with other things.

Denials by X of association with Y or Z could be either true or worthless. Further, by using fictitious names, multiple identities could be created without others knowing.*

Also, reducing the possibility of sock-puppetry, astroturfing or multiple identities is surely a good thing all around?

Finally, the advantage to a social media proprietor, is that by making members feel more identifiable, the risk of libellous statements and possible actions for defamation could be reduced.

CDC
Haringey Councillor
Liberal Democrat Party

---------------------

* The person who was possible history's most effective and inventive creator of multiple identities (in aid of deceiving the Abwehr) was the brilliant Spanish agent Garbo.

Scroll on this page to view the network of 27 agents – totally fictitious – that he confected).