#5 Social Media: Anonymity

    Social media has facilitated unlimited connection between people all around the world, albeit at a price. One of the features of social media, that has gained notoriety recently is anonymity, which allows internet users to hide their real identity when going online. A heated debate has formed regarding the benefits and consequences of anonymity, and no consensus has been made as to whether it should be preserved or banned. Its advocates believe this feature is an essential part of online privacy and free speech in an age of online surveillance and self-censorship (Murphy & O’Leary). The opposite side argues anonymous accounts on social media have done nothing more than being a proliferating germ of fake news, spams and trolls (Imbellino). 

    A survey done by Rainie Lee and his colleagues featured in their article “Anonymity, Privacy, and Security Online” shows that 59 percent of users believed they cannot be completely anonymous on social media, while 37 percent of them believed the opposite. Some 68 percent of users thought that laws were not good enough to protect their privacy on social media, while 24 percent thought they were effective (Rainie et al). 

     Everything has two sides. No one can deny the advantages that anonymity on the internet brings to users. According to a survey, 86 percent of users reported they had taken steps to remove their digital footprints (Rainie et al). This statistic proves that internet users tend to avoid being seen by others on social media. Thanks to the anonymous feature, internet users can discuss freely about politics without fear of losing their jobs (Ball). Hiding one’s identity allows people to disclose the harsh truth, face their true feelings, and avoid creating an idealized version of themselves online (Murphy & O’Leary). The veil provided by anonymity might protect the personal privacy of internet users and advocate the right of free speech (Murphy & O’Leary). When people approach an idea, the content of the idea itself is more important than the person who says it (Peterson). Evidently, it is a pity if people cannot express and contribute their ideas because they do not want to disclose their identities (Peterson). However, anonymity has many disadvantages. It is the reason for the torrent of reports of online harassment and cyberbully. Concealing real identities allows people to feel less accountable for their thoughts and actions on social media (Murphy & O’Leary). They may say whatever they want because no one can judge or evaluate them. People become increasingly more critical, rude and threatening towards one another due to the lack of fear of responsibilities (Murphy & O’Leary). Dr. John Suler, specialist in online behavior called this phenomenon the “online disinhibition effect” (Murphy & O’Leary). Moreover, anonymity is also used as a tool to spread misinformation, junk advertisements, and to manipulate public thinking on social media platforms, such as Facebook or Twitter (Imbellino). Anonymity could be quite bothersome, 35.000 anonymous spamming accounts needs to be banned and reported on social media each year (Imbellino). 

    The academic article “The social value of anonymity on campus: a study of the decline of Yik Yak” conducted by Dr. Sian Bayne and her colleagues, who studied the final year of operation of the social media application Yik Yak, was published in February of 2019. The authors considered the social value of anonymity towards university students on social media. The paper provides the statistics to argue that anonymity on social media had an important value for student communities to counter the most common argument made against anonymity, which is that this feature is a germ of cyberbully and fake news. The authors emphasized this article does not attempt to neglect the negative impact of online anonymity, but only suggests that people need to discuss about the values of anonymity on social media more equitably. This study of a now-lost social network contains a valuable portrait that helps people better understand the risk of removing and denying anonymity. 

    In 2014, after only a year of function, the anonymous online application Yik Yak became the third most popular US iOS download with approximately 50 to 80 percent of students using this application in around 1600 U.S university campuses (Bayne et al). In 2015, approximately 30 percent of undergraduate students in UK universities used Yik Yak on a regular basis (Bayne et al). At that time, the value of this app reached four hundred million dollars with around two million monthly active users (Bayne et al). The growth rate of Yik Yak shows that the anonymous feature of this app was attractive to university students. Evidently, they preferred to hide their identity so that they could comfortably use social media. 

    In a broader sense, people expect freedom from surveillance, accountability and social constraints. Not surprisingly, after Yik Yak had adjusted some of its policies in order to reduce anonymity because of the torrent of reports of harassment, the amounts of its users dropped considerably to 1067th in 2016 (Bayne et al). At that time, the estimated number of monthly active users tumbled from two million to 264.000, which marked the decline of Yik Yak and caused this app to eventually shut down in 2017 (Bayne et al). The data supports the fact that online anonymity is one of the most significant elements in the social media ecologies of university students and it can determine the survival of an online application. Bayne and her colleagues repeatedly mentioned that Yik Yak failed not because of the initial anonymity policy, but of their later policies to reduce anonymity. The data extraction of the failure of Yik Yak might help people better understand the social value of online anonymity towards students. It is likely that the findings of this study can serve as a clear indication that instead of responding to anonymity solely by disinhibition and victimization, people need to admit its advantages in an age of online surveillance. 

    Anonymity certainly has both benefits and harms. There are more options to solve this problem other than simply keeping or banning anonymity. Forbidding is not a long-term solution. It might violate the right of free-speech and individual privacy specified in The First Amendment. It might also stifle people who are willing to speak and contribute ideas when those people do not want their actions online to negatively impact their life. Instead of prohibiting anonymity, government and service providers can implement other policies to simultaneously protect the right of free-speech and limit cyber bullying as well as fake news. In addition, users also need to be responsible to reduce the consequences of anonymity on social media. 

     Education is a critical factor that could minimize the consequences of online anonymity. In an article by The Conversation, the author explains that parents and educators need to guide and educate adolescents about the perils of social media consumption. The school curricula should be updated so that children are more informed about this respect (Murphy & O’Leary). Besides, app designers and service providers should also reconsider their policies to reduce the negative effects that come from the applications they provide. Apparently, “safeguarding should Huynh 5 top the agendas of Silicon Valley companies, especially when they are targeting young people and freeing people to say whatever they like without fear of repercussions” (Murphy & O’Leary). Moreover, the government should enact laws that prompt anonymity, while still making sure that they can force users to be held accountable when they take advantage of anonymity to harm others. In the article “The important of being anonymity”, the author mentions the traceability of anonymity, which means that if someone attacks others online, people might find them and charge them according to the law. However, there is one question concerning anonymity that requires further research into, that is if the government can figure out who an anonymous person is, do the internet service providers violate the privacy rights of users? This suggested question might take more time to be answered, but the result will help both the government and service providers adjust their policies and laws. Accordingly, the adjusted regulations will give users a better social media environment.

Works Cited 

Ball, James. "Banning Anonymous Social Media Accounts Will Do More Harm Than Good." The Guardian, 25 Sept. 2018, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/25/angelarayner-social-media-online-abuse-labour-party/. 

Bayne, Sian, et al. "The Social Value of Anonymity on Campus: A Study of the Decline of Yik Yak." Learning, Media, and Technology, Taylor & Francis, 27 Feb. 2019, www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17439884.2019.1583672?fbclid=IwAR1CS4hXy FelvTa1mzY8ehiQjGwiTB9x9X9VQj/. 

Imbellino, Daniel. "Is Identity Verification the Answer to Ending Spam and Fake News on Social Media?" Medium, 26 Feb. 2018, medium.com/strategic-social-news-wire/isidentity-verification-the-answer-to-ending-spam-and-fake-news-on-social-media5940f816f0b3/. 

Murphy, Stephen, and Killian O'Leary. "Anonymous Apps Risk Fuelling Cyberbullying but They Also Fill a Vital Role." The Conversation, 11 July 2019, theconversation.com/anonymous-apps-risk-fuelling-cyberbullying-but-they-also-fill-avital-role-119836/. 

Rainie, Lee, et al. "Anonymity, Privacy, and Security Online." Pew Research Center, 30 May 2020, www.pewresearch.org/internet/2013/09/05/anonymity-privacy-andsecurity-online/. Ramnath, R. "The Importance of Being Anonymous." Founding Fuel, 13 July 2017, www.foundingfuel.com/article/the-importance-of-being-anonymous/. 

Peterson, Eric. "Anonymous Speech Is More Important Than Ever. TED Proves It." WIRED, 1 Nov. 2016, www.wired.com/2016/11/anonymous-speech-important-ever-ted-proves/