The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.
Unmasked
: Hilarious story in the NY Times today reporting that anonymous reviewers of books at Amazon were temporarily unmasked as their real identities were posted. One of them was an author who raved about his own book. Others were surely embarrassed by their bile.
It’s a good lesson to the anonymous posters on blogs and forums: What if you were unmasked and identified. Would you still say what you’re saying? Would you still click on that “post” button?
Oh fooey. Jeff, it’s your own software. If you didn’t like anonymous posters, just make sure that posters have to have verified email addresses.
You have an economic incentive to promote anonymous posters, it makes for a lively discussion, and it brings in page views.
Which is why I always sign my name and put my site in the URL.
Blogging made anonymity redundant- at least for me. I want people to visit my site. Once I left a comment on Anil Dash’s site and it generated over 100 visits for me.
The more people feel they know you, the more powerful a tool the web is for you. Anonymity is counter-productive.
I haven’t posted anything I wouldn’t want posted under my real name; at this point I’m not sure why I’m still leaving comments under a psued. I’m not a blogger and I don’t have any plans to blog, so I don’t have a page for anyone to visit. I don’t think of myself as shy; it just feels weird to leave my name and email address all over the web where lots of strangers can see it. And I’m not sure what my firm would think if they saw my name in comments sections of blogs; then again, I’m not sure anyone at my firm reads blogs.
I’m going to think about this. Maybe I just need to start commenting under my own name. It’s not like I’m well known or anything – I bet no one would notice.
I’d think twice.
Food for thought!
Jeff, this may be the only subject under the sun where I agree with anne.elk: your harping on this is foolish. I use my real name on my blog and in comments for a variety of reasons, but I have nothing against pseudonyms per se. As others have already pointed out, there are a multitude of reasons people have for not using their real names, and they aren’t all bad ones. Of course it can be annoying when some cowardly commenter uses your blog comments like their very own personal graffitti wall, but the only way to avoid this is to implement comment moderation hacks or forbid commenting altogether, or change the comment link to an email link. But gloating over how people’s true identities can be revealed on the internet is certainly no way to encourage people to “come clean” in the way that you think right and proper. All it will do is discourage people from using this wonderful “communication medium” that you are supposedly promoting. I know too many people who have (not always unreasonable) fears of what might happen to them if they reveal themselves on a public forum like this to laugh at them. And you also might want to remember that not everyone in the world lives in the often-incestuous, cheek-by-jowl, crowded New York media-personality existence. Most people, in fact, are not only used to being unknown and having their identies kept private from all but their close circle of family and friends, they prefer it that way.
(By the way, anne, forcing people to leave an email in the comments is meaningless when it comes to anonymity or the prevention — people just make up fake ones like you do, there is no way to prevent that.)
Aargh. In the last sentence I meant to write “the prevention thereof.”
I’m with you on this one Jeff. There may be a lot of good reasons not to disclose your name on the net, but unless you are putting in your address, social, etc. you aren’t exactly risking that much, EXCEPT for people knowing what you REALLY think, which can be uncomfortable. I personally can’t take anonymous posts, particularly with no e mail address seriously. If there is no fear of recrimination of any kind, even in a word war, it becomes too easy to say ANYTHING. I know that the opposite is exactly the argument here, that if there is no fear of recrimination some people will be more likely to post certain things. In my book, that’s just plain and simple cowardice. Didn’t we learn any broader lessons from 9/11? Make who you are and what you stand for matter, we never know how much time we have here.
I don’t have a problem with anonymous postings as long as it is kept civil. If a person can’t make their point without profanity, I am not going to take them seriously whether I know there name or not. Being a conservative who lives in liberal Massachusetts, I would not want to post my name because I would be afraid my political opinions may be held against me in a job hunt. I know that many employers now do a Google search of prospective employees. There is no way anyone would know if an employer ruled out people who did not agree with him/her. I know that most people would not go this far but I don’t feel like taking that chance.
Ok, sorry for my previous comment, Hawkman. It was just a response to the sneering in the post.
I’m not sure how the Amazon.com – blog/forum connection holds. When an author raves about his own book anonymously, it’s exploiting the trust that people reading his/her opinion have placed in the writer being a disinterested party.
Those who were embarrassed by their bile don’t necessarily have different opinions now that they’re accountable, do they? The only difference is that their opinion is truncated to the least negative one they would present to anyone in the world, at all. Same for blog/forum posts.
What I don’t understand is why someone would be less likely to read an anonymous comment. It’s a true opinion, isn’t it? Sure it might not be verifiable, and the person presenting it may not be held accountable, but it’s a real opinion on an issue. Which should be accorded its place in the marketplace of ideas.
“In my book, that’s just plain and simple cowardice. Didn’t we learn any broader lessons from 9/11? Make who you are and what you stand for matter, we never know how much time we have here.”
That would work in a perfect world, Dupont. Being able to express what you want does not come with immunity from offending someone. And where you strike the balance there does not always amount to chickening out. Yes, it’s important to stand for what you believe, but we’re all meshed in greater societal framework, including people who aren’t particularly fond of your speech. Biased employers, family, and well, stalkers. All real hazards that have affected people publishing online in the past. If I hide my political opinions from my employer to make sure I don’t run into trouble at work, it’s not cowardice—it’s being careful.
Eventually, users recognizing the pitfalls of potentially abusable systems–such as readers not taking an Amazon.com user opinion at face value–is a better solution than owners discouraging their usage in a potentially abusable manner.
MB has used this monker for so long now, that there are more than a few that know who she is. That said, she has said nothing that she would not say under her own name, having written Letters to the Editor for many years under her own name. If it becomes legally necessary, she is NOT hard to find, but attracting the vicious, nasty people that prowl the I-Net looking for victims is just downright foolish and possibly dangerous.
Firas, I know that it I’m sounding black and white here, and I’m probably going to irritate you more here, but I value the discussion. I hear your concerns and those of others. I’m not above admitting that, like many people, I do take basic annoyance precautions, such as using a hotmail address when posting that I check regularly, but at least someone can’t track down my exact location by my IP address that way. I’m married to a military guy, I come from a military family. This is the way that we think. Hell, we’re already on the list, just for being in the military for millions around the globe. For millions more, we’re their greatest hope. I have been in a war of words with an admitted jihadist from Saudi Arabia because of comments that I posted. So far nothing more than that has come of it. I may be naive, but I believe long term in the ideals of this country. If some guy in the ME wants to hunt me down because of some comments, I’m sure that he could do that. I’m also sure that my brother in law serving in Africa could get killed tomorrow for what he is doing to try and help over there. Somebody’s got to fight in the fields, and somebody’s got to fight in the word war. It takes both. I’d personally rather not work for a person that subverts the law when employing people anyway. BTW, according to Google my husband could have been the actor in Star Trek V, how the hell do these people know that you are you unless they find your actual resume on line, or like Jeff, you truly put it out there?! I worked at the liberal haven of Harvard B-School so I know what you are saying there, and I still stand by my statement. Stalkers, I’ve dealt with one of those at least. Family, you bet, I still think that’s the hardest one, but again, do I want my family to really know who I am and what I think, or do I just shut up in the name of harmony? It’s a balancing act, and hopefully if I am diplomatic and respectful enough in the way that I present my argument, they will at worst agree to disagree.
‘Night all.
The NY Times article mentions that Anthony Burgess reviewed his own books. It fails to mention that this only happened once, when an editor gave him a book to review by Joseph Kell. The editor did not know that Joseph Kell was a pseudonym for Anthony Burgess. The article also fails to mention that Burgess proceeded to write a negative review of his own book, a review which included this statement: “It may even make some people sick.”
Not exactly hyping himself there.
Andrea:
I think the point of this post was much more limited than how you’re construing it. I think all Jeff means to say is that if you’re writing something anonymously/pseudonymously on the internet you should first ask yourself if it’s something that you’d be proud to attach your real name to. If not, you’re probably using anonymity/pseudonymity as a crutch to allow you to be less civil than you would normaly in real life using your real name. In my experience, this is generally the case, though of course there are exceptions.