Banning anonymous social media accounts won’t stop hate speech

Anonymity as a form of protection

While there are many examples of people using anonymous social media accounts to abuse others online, it’s equally clear that anonymity can be a lifeline to many users and communities. Posting anonymously can allow people toprotect themselves– to openly discuss and deal with complex topics safely. It can allow people tospeak out about abuse, and seek information.

For example, social media users inLGBTQIA+ communitieshave spoken about the importance of online anonymity as a way to negotiate discussions of sexuality safely, where disclosing their name might put them at significant risk of abuse and harm online and offline. Some said anonymity allowed them to access valuable information online as they navigated their own identities.

In my own research formy 2020 bookabout social media design and identity, my participants talked about the many ways in which they felt anonymity helped them to develop a sense of community. One participant discussed how social relationships were formed via comment boards with others using pseudonyms: “I know some really personal stuff about all of them, apart from the fact that I don’t know their names.”

While respondents did talk about incidents of abuse online from anonymous users, it was clear that equally, anonymity provided pathways to building communities and support networks. An insistence on real names can present barriers and challenges toalready marginalizedcommunities and users for whom “real names” are a complex issue. These include gender non-conforming users, drag queens, Native Americans and survivors of abuse. Many abusers are not anonymous

Anonymity can be used to abuse “othered” groups such as women, LGBTQIA+ people and Muslims. However,research showsthat people using their real names perpetrate abuse and bullying too.

On social media, we continue to see users willing to say abusive things and share dangerous content with their full names, job titles and informationon display. Banning anonymous social media profiles therefore isn’t going toaddress the rootof the hate we see online, be that directed at marginalized communities or at MPs.

Research showsBlack and Asian female MPsface the most abuse aimed at female MPs online, suggesting the issue of anonymity is perhaps not the root cause of abuse, but a way for deeper social issues to manifest online. Katrin Tiidenberg and Emily van der Nagel write in their bookSex and Social Media:

I would agree with this, and call on platforms to take more responsibility for the communities they foster, and the voices and discourses they emphasize and minimize online. While it’s refreshing to see politicians’ desire to tackle online abuse, banning anonymity isn’t the answer. Anonymity can be a vital lifeline for already marginalized communities, and removing it could inadvertently harm the very communities MPs seek to protect.

Article byHarry T Dyer, Lecturer in Education,University of East Anglia

This article is republished fromThe Conversationunder a Creative Commons license. Read theoriginal article.

Story byThe Conversation

An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.

Get the TNW newsletter

Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.

Also tagged with

More TNW

About TNW

Opinion: The AI pope coat is the shape of hyperreality to come

85% of EU citizens want more political action against disinformation

Discover TNW All Access

Social media has new moderation problems. This AI startup has a solution

Telegram’s Pavel Durov arrested: 12 charges France is investigating