Would an end to anonymous posting improve social media?

[Core Imposter]

They could make it illegal to connect to such a private space.

People could get hung for things like that.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Then why speak of killing social media?

Because it is an interesting question with more than one answer.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Be trans on the internet for a week and then come back and say that.

Hell just a cursory scroll through facebook would suffice to dispel the notion.

You of all people should know than that it would be a bad thing if the entire world was forced into a closet forever.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Seems like another good way to realise the 1984 world we are living in already. You write in social media only what big brother approves of. Cutlery incidents make you uneasy about nu-europeans, just don't share that with anyone! Then we all wake up in a tru fascist police state because rampant autocrats got in power voted in by the unwashed ungated toothless masses that folks in rainbow ivory towers despise so much!

I'm continually reminded that facist, skull measuring rhetoric is allowed on this site as long as you cloak it under the guise of irony or sarcasm, like the post i quoted above, as long as you toe the line, dance around the subject and make vague allusions.

You have to wonder if the same people wpuld say it openly, outloud with their chest if they were directly linked to it or would the consequences of being shamed or being knocked out for their bigotry be enough?

 

[danjuno]

Like @sophie said, bigots aren't shy about this even with their names attached.

 

[warpus]

Forcing the end of anonymity across all social media? It would:

1. Stifle free expression
2. Put a dent in privacy rights
3. Put a target on certain people's backs and unnecessarily put them in harm's way
4. Empower corporations and governments by taking power away from individuals
5. Stifle whistleblower type behaviour as well as other speaking-out-about-an-injustice type posts by those who have experienced it or are in the know about it

A blanket ban of remaining anonymous online goes against so many ideals that the internet was founded on in the first place. I would even go as far as potentially branding it fascist. No doubt governments and corporations around the world would salivate at the mere thought of this being a reality. If such a blanket ban on remaining anonymous online were ever a reality, those who have power, money, and influence would nevertheless be able to get any message across they wanted to anyway, using third parties, corporations, shell companies, super PACs, and other related constructs. Meanwhile your common citizen would be left in the dark.

It would make some things safer, while making others less so. Overall it would send the whole online space backwards by decades.

If netizens had a choice between equally popular & far reaching social media platforms, some enforcing a lack of anonymity while the others didn't... that would be a slightly different question. "Let the free market decide" in that case. We don't have that luxury though - social media platforms take a lot of $$$ and time to fill the niches that they have filled, and most don't really have equally popular and far reaching alternatives. If reddit suddenly enforced using your real name and your real name only, what alternative could users flock to? There aren't any.

If certain social media platforms are unsafe in some way, then the answer is to critically analyze why that is so, and look at existing laws & their enforcement to try to understand why they aren't enough in curbing that behaviour. Then you can reform the laws and make sure that they are enforced. Don't take away people's rights in the name of safety. There are far better methods of accomplishing this.

 

[Kaitzilla]

I do not think one can put the genie back in the bottle. In addition, I think each iteration of social media (FB, X, Instagram, Tik Toc, Discord etc.) has generational and demographic aspects.

TikTok will be banned in January 19th which is 4.5 months from now by Congressional law.

It has 150 million users in USA.

TikTok continues to deny China links, argues against US ban in court

It was back in March when a group of lawmakers announced a bill that would force ByteDance to sell TikTok's US assets or be banned in the...

www.techspot.com

The new President is sworn in on January 20th, so Trump can't stop it at all even if he thought he could overrule Congress.

USA has to compete against France and Brazil somehow.


Also, anonymous posting is nice.
I guess if everyone had to post with real names and faces, there would be no way to let off steam online.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Well now, first he can campaign on the "Dems want to ban your TikTok" and,
if elected, nominate SCOTUS judges who will rule in favour of TikTok.

 

[Ordnael]

I'm continually reminded that facist, skull measuring rhetoric is allowed on this site as long as you cloak it under the guise of irony or sarcasm, like the post i quoted above, as long as you toe the line, dance around the subject and make vague allusions.

You have to wonder if the same people wpuld say it openly, outloud with their chest if they were directly linked to it or would the consequences of being shamed or being knocked out for their bigotry be enough?

You just tip toed around calling me some very nasty things but I will not cry about it.

 

[Crezth]

You of all people should know than that it would be a bad thing if the entire world was forced into a closet forever.

Yeah I just want to know who you're worried of being canceled by? Friends? People who have a good opinion of you? I think you're missing some necessary precepts here.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

I wonder how ending anonymous posting would change social media. One would have to be an identified real person to contribute or participate.

Moved from the Musk thread. there are many variations on yes and no and shades of grey. The poll is to capture the big picture while posts should express more nuance and thoughtful reasoning.

Coming from a trans teenager in a very conservative state:
I'd be scared if people knew that I'm trans so I'd love to stay anonymous until I'm able to leave the state. I'd be kicked out of my school and possibly my family too if I was outed.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Forced doxxing doesn't seem like a good idea.

Also, they tried this in the CBC comments and most of the posts are still utter trash.

 

[Core Imposter]

I'm continually reminded that facist, skull measuring rhetoric is allowed on this site as long as you cloak it under the guise of irony or sarcasm, like the post i quoted above, as long as you toe the line, dance around the subject and make vague allusions.

You have to wonder if the same people wpuld say it openly, outloud with their chest if they were directly linked to it or would the consequences of being shamed or being knocked out for their bigotry be enough?

One man's bigotry is another man's truth. If I read aloud scriptures from the King James some will bristle and chant for censure and I would be appalled and bewildered, however, just the same, the Taliban can read from the Koran, with women wholly clad, and I will bristle and chant for censure, leaving them enraged.

The only intelligent way forward is to allow speech free without censure. It will never be possible to create a world where everyone believes the same because truth is not a fact.

edit: and as far as being shamed or violently coerced, you should know, for one example, Christians will stand on their beliefs unto crucifixion even today. So no, work it will not.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

You heard it here folks

 

[Kyriakos]

Making doxing obligatory (it is currently a crime) won't just hurt those who have (various shades of) negative views to share. Imagine if you are a member of a threatened minority and have to talk about it using your name= you likely won't.
Anonymity is a main reason the web is so popular. Those that don't get it, hopefully will never have an actual say on whether it changes.

 

[Voidwalkin]

The only intelligent way forward is to allow speech free without censure. It will never be possible to create a world where everyone believes the same because truth is not a fact.

Speech without censure has not traditionally been understood to be part of free speech protections. Those, traditionally, only restrict the state imposing penalties for speech it doesn't like.

I can see why conservatives are more and more frequently including freedom from censure in their understanding of what free speech is. It isn't a secret that the values gap has widened. Today, conservative beliefs and values held for decades without controversy will make you outcast amongst liberals. Before, only conservatives could be fairly said to be intolerant of divergent opinions... now it's true of both.

Social media as a whole drives rapid evolution of moralism and intensification of it, through the echo chamber effect... probably lead to two separate societies only slightly able to coexist. Because conservative attitudes and values are not really favored by the business elite, they will be on the backfoot, as they have been, and will probably by inevitably discarded entirely by future generations attempting to better navigate the corporate ladder.

Which probably also has much to do with increasing conservative willingness to use the state to secure political power. Their values will disintegrate organically. They cannot be maintained unless power is directed to their maintenance directly.

 

[Voidwalkin]

Yeah I just want to know who you're worried of being canceled by? Friends? People who have a good opinion of you?

That's probably where most cancelations originate from, now that I think about it.

I dunno many people with friendships secure enough that they need not fear their loss. Links between people are pretty tenous these days. Contact is more infrequent and briefer. Real support is rare. In some cases, it's absent.

I think people need a minimum of expectation that they'll be supported when they're wrong to feel above the secure/insecure threshold... tbh I have no confidence in that. It's not surprising to me that some would fret cancellation by their own friends. IMO it's a pretty natural evolution of social ties and social trust weakening substantially over the past 15 years or so.

 

[Birdjaguar]

How Disinformation From a Russian AI Spam Farm Ended up on Top of Google Search Results​

A fake article about Volodymyr Zelensky’s wife buying a $4.8 million Bugatti with US aid was promoted by bots, Russia state media, and pro-Trump influencers on X. It’s part of a network of websites supercharged by AI.

How Disinformation From a Russian AI Spam Farm Ended up on Top of Google Search Results

A fake article about Volodymyr Zelensky’s wife buying a $4.8 million Bugatti with US aid was promoted by bots, Russia state media, and pro-Trump influencers on X. It’s part of a network of websites supercharged by AI.

www.wired.com

 

[Core Imposter]

Are you saying that we should all be certified not to be bots before we can use social media?

 

[Crezth]

That's probably where most cancelations originate from, now that I think about it.

I dunno many people with friendships secure enough that they need not fear their loss. Links between people are pretty tenous these days. Contact is more infrequent and briefer. Real support is rare. In some cases, it's absent.

I think people need a minimum of expectation that they'll be supported when they're wrong to feel above the secure/insecure threshold... tbh I have no confidence in that. It's not surprising to me that some would fret cancellation by their own friends. IMO it's a pretty natural evolution of social ties and social trust weakening substantially over the past 15 years or so.

Nah. I think that come what may and let the weak be consumed. Y'all just bleeding hearts.